← EFTA02739481Court RecordsEFTA02739516 →

EFTA02739492

Court Records

Extracted Text #

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 1 of 24 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA-Ma 
JANE DOE NO. 3, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
JEFFREY EPSTEIN, 
Defendant. 
DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE & OBJECTIONS 
TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 
Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, by and through his undersigned counsel, 
serves his responses and objections to Plaintiffs Amended First Request For 
Production To Defendant, dated December 9, 2008. 
Request No. 1. The list provided to you by the U.S. Attorney of individuals 
whom the U.S. Attorney was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an 
offense by Mr. Epstein enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
EXHIBIT "B" 
EFTA02739492

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 2 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 2 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. 
Request No. 2. All documents referring or relating to the United States' 
agreement with Defendant to defer federal prosecution subject to certain 
conditions, including without limitation, the operative agreement between 
Defendant and the United States and all amendments, revisions and 
supplements thereto. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
EFTA02739493

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 3 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 3 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. 
Request No. 3. All documents referring or relating to Defendant's agreement 
with the State of Florida on his plea of guilty to violations of Florida Criminal 
Statutes, including without limitation, the operative plea agreement and any 
amendments, revisions and supplements thereto. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
EFTA02739494

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 4 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 4 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Whatever public documents exist are in the State Court file and 
equally accessible to Plaintiff. 
Request No.4. All documents obtained in discovery or investigation relating 
to either the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal Case, including 
without limitation, documents obtained from any federal, state, or local law 
enforcement agency, the State Attorney's office and the United States Attorney's 
office. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth. Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
EFTA02739495

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 5 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 5 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Request No. 4 seeks documents that are attorney-client and 
work product privileged in that it seeks "all documents obtained in discovery or 
investigation relating either to the Florida Criminal Case or the Federal Criminal 
Case ... ." In addition, such documents are privileged and confidential as they 
are the subject of a pending investigation. 
Request No. 5. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone 
calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and 
message pads. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
EFTA02739496

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 6 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 6 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Defendant objects as the request is overbroad and seeks 
information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor 
does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible 
evidence. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." 
Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 until 
present regarding any and all telephone records and other documents reflecting 
any and all telephone calls made to or by Defendant. As phrased, the request 
includes attorney-client and work product privileged information, as well as 
records and documents of calls having absolutely no relationship to any of the 
allegations in this action. 
Request No. 6. All telephone records and other documents reflecting telephone 
calls made by or to Defendant, including without limitation, telephone logs and 
message pads, reflecting telephone calls made by or to employees. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
EFTA02739497

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 7 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 7 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, as defined by Plaintiff in 
paragraph g of her request, the term employee is overly broad and encompasses 
information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of the pending action nor 
does it appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible 
evidence. Further, the request seeks information pertaining to person who are 
not parties to this action and whose privacy rights are implicated. 
Request No. 7. All surveillance videos, slides, film, videotape, digital recording 
or other audio or video depiction or image of the Palm Beach Residence. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
EFTA02739498

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 8 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 8 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiffs request seeks information for a time period of January 1, 2003 
until present regarding "all surveillance videos, etc., or image of the Palm Beach 
Residence." 
Request No. 8. All documents referring or relating to Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2, 
including without limitation, web pages, social networking site pages, 
correspondence, videotapes and audiotapes. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
EFTA02739499

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 9 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 9 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. 
Request No. 9. All statements taken, transcribed or recorded from any person 
referring or relating to Defendant's sexual conduct, massages given to Defendant 
or any issue in these cases. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
EFTA02739500

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 10 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 10 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. 
Request No. 10. All documents referring to or relating to air travel and aircraft 
used by Defendant, including without limitation, flight logs and flight manifests. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time 
period of "in or about 2004 — 2005." Plaintiffs request seeks documents for a 
EFTA02739501

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 11 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 11 
time period of January 1, 2003 until present regarding air travel and aircraft used 
by Defendant. 
Request No. 11. Any and all documents referring to or relating to modeling 
agencies, including but not limited to documents relating to or reflecting 
communications with female models. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. 
EFTA02739502

• Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 12 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 12 
Request No. 12. All photographs, videotapes, digital images and other 
documents depicting or showing females who, at the time thereof, were under 
the age of 21, which were taken or created by or for Defendant and not intended 
for sale commercially to the public. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. 
EFTA02739503

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 13 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 13 
Request No. 13. All photographs and painting of females which were displayed 
in any of Defendant's homes or residences in the time frame of these requests, 
including without limitation, photographs in standing or sifting frames or wall 
frames. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiff's request has no time limitation. 
EFTA02739504

• Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 14 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 14 
Request No. 14. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to 
communications between Jeffrey Epstein and including, but not 
limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, 
and e-mails. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. 
EFTA02739505

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 15 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 15 
Request No. 15. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to 
communications between Jeffrey Epstein and , including, but not 
limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking sites, 
and e-mails. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. 
EFTA02739506

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 16 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 16 
Request No. 16. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to 
communications between Jeffrey Epstein and including, but 
not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking 
sites, and e-mails. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Ha. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. 
EFTA02739507

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 17 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 17 
Request No. 17. Any and all documents consisting of, referring or relating to 
communications between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including, but 
not limited to, letters, notes, text messages, messages on social networking 
sites, and e-mails. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. 
EFTA02739508

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 18 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 18 
Request No. 18. Any and all documents and photographs placed by Defendant 
at any time in the period of these requests on a social networking website, 
including without limitation, Facebook.com and MySpace.com. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiff's complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiffs request seeks documents and photographs for a time period of 
January 1, 2003 until present. 
EFTA02739509

' Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 19 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 19 
Request No. 19. Any and all documents reflecting or consisting of 
communications between Jeffrey Epstein and MC2 Models or Jean-Luc Brunel, 
relating or referring to females coming into the United States from other countries 
to pursue a career in modeling, including, but not limited to, letters, notes and e-
mails. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
EFTA02739510

Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 20 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 20 
2005." In addition, the request seeks documents pertaining to females who are 
not non-parties, and who possess privacy rights. 
Request No. 20. Any and all documents referring or relating to gifts or loans to 
females under the age of 21, including, but not limited to, notes, receipts and car 
rental agreements. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Plaintiffs request has no time limitation. 
EFTA02739511

' Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 21 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 21 
Request No. 21. Any and all personal calendars or schedules of or for Jeffrey 
Epstein from January 1, 2003 to the present. 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." In addition, the request encompasses attorney-client privileged material. 
Request No. 22. All documents written by Jeffrey Epstein consisting of personal 
thoughts, feelings or descriptions of events, incidents or occurrences in 
Defendant's life, including without limitation, any diaries of Jeffrey Epstein. 
EFTA02739512

• Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 22 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 22 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 - 
2005." On its fact, the request goes beyond the scope of allowable discovery 
and is meant to harass, embarrass and overburden the Defendant. Further, the 
request is so overly broad that it includes attorney-client and work product 
privileged materials. 
Request No. 23. All documents referring to or relating to Jeffrey Epstein's 
purchase or consumption of prescription medicine. 
EFTA02739513

' Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 23 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 23 
Response: Defendant is asserting specific legal objections to the production 
request as well as his U.S. constitutional privileges. I intend to produce all 
relevant documents regarding this lawsuit, however, my attorneys have 
counseled me that at the present time I cannot select, authenticate, and produce 
documents relevant to this lawsuit and I must accept this advice or risk losing my 
Sixth Amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my 
federal constitutional rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments 
as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Drawing an adverse inference 
under these circumstances would unconstitutionally burden my exercise of my 
constitutional rights, would be unreasonable, and would therefore violate the 
Constitution. In addition to and without waiving his constitutional privileges, the 
information sought is privileged and confidential, and inadmissible pursuant to 
the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, Fed. Rule of Evidence 410 and 
408, and §90.410, Fla. Stat. Further, the request is overly broad, work product, 
attorney-client privileged, and confidential. In addition, the request seeks 
information concerning persons, not parties to this litigation, whose privacy rights 
are implicated. Plaintiffs complaint alleges a time period of "in or about 2004 — 
2005." Defendant's medical condition is not at issue in this action. Such a 
request is meant to harass and embarrass Defendant. Further, such information 
is privileged pursuant to Fed. Rule 501 and §90.503, Fla. Stat. In addition, such 
information is protected by the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and 
Accountability Act (HIPAA). 
EFTA02739514

' Case 9:08-cv-80232-KAM Document 51-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2009 Page 24 of 24 
Jane Doe No. 3 v. Epstein 
Page 24 
Certificate of Service 
WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been sent 
via U.S. Mail and facsimile to the following addressees this  26th  day of 
January, 2009. 
Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. 
Jeffrey Marc Herman, Esq. 
Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. 
18205 Biscayne Boulevard 
Suite 2218 
Miami, FL 33160 
[Phone Redacted] 
Fax: [Phone Redacted] 
ahorowitz hermanlaw.com 
ihermanahermanlaw.com 
Irivera hermanlaw.com 
Counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe #3 
Jack Alan Goldberger 
Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 
250 Australian Avenue South 
Suite 1400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 
[Phone Redacted] 
Fax: [Phone Redacted] 
jadesq(bellsouth.net 
Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey 
Epstein 
Respectfully sub 
By: 
ROBERT D. RITTON, JR., ESQ. 
Florida Bar o. 224162 
rcrit bciclaw.com 
MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ. 
Florida Bar #617296 
mpike bciclaw.com 
BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & 
COLEMAN 
515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 400 
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
[Phone Redacted] 
Fax: [Phone Redacted] 
(Co-counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) 
EFTA02739515
← EFTA02739481Court RecordsEFTA02739516 →