Judge Rules Virginia Giuffre's Lawyers Must 'Destroy' Jeffrey Epstein Files
Source: Newsweek
Attorneys for Virginia Giuffre, who publicly accused Jeffrey Epstein of sex trafficking, must destroy files they obtained on Epstein after a Wednesday ruling by a federal judge.
Epstein was arrested in July 2019 on charges of sex trafficking and conspiracy to engage in sex trafficking. Allegedly, Epstein procured women to have sexual relations with high-profile individuals, such as Prince Andrew. Information about Epstein, culled from a 2015 civil suit filed against Epstein by Giuffre, allegedly contained the names of individuals with whom Epstein had conducted business.
Senior U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska ruled Wednesday that Giuffre's lawyers had come into possession of the documents improperly, noting that the protective order could only be enforced during the civil lawsuit proceedings which had already been settled. Preska wrote that all the materials in the files "shall be destroyed."
Preska also requested proof that the documentation had been destroyed. "Counsel shall submit an affidavit detailing the steps taken to do so," Preska's ruling added.
Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/judge-rules-virginia-giuffres-lawyers-must-destroy-jeffrey-epstein-files-1514909
This relates to Alan Dershowitz. He was trying to see all these files, and Giuffre's lawyers were denying him access. Now Dershowitz won't be able to get hold of them through Giuffre.
ashredux
(2,598 posts)niyad
(113,027 posts)But you do raise a good question.
oldsoftie
(12,486 posts)Mr.Bill
(24,228 posts)among other things.
ArizonaLib
(1,242 posts)If the records are considered no longer useful in court, why should they be destroyed? Can't the court put restrictions on the use of those documents? This way if this judge is protecting someone, say the president, an appellate court can review this order and reverse it if necessary?
I have a feeling those documents are useful to someone.
Strange that the files MUST be destroyed.
leftieNanner
(15,058 posts)But merely copies. I would be surprised, like you, that a judge would require all original documents in an ongoing case be destroyed.
ArizonaLib
(1,242 posts)Even copies have value - the information on the copies can be corroborated if authenticity is successfully challenged or doubted. Originals can be subpoena'd by a court.
oldsoftie
(12,486 posts)zentrum
(9,865 posts).same "LOT of people" that know something about his mysterious death?
Scarsdale
(9,426 posts)come straight from Barr?
pnwmom
(108,954 posts)He'd been suing for access to them.
So I doubt the judge did what Barr wanted.
certainot
(9,090 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)SayItLoud
(1,701 posts)Anonymous, if you're listening.....
not_the_one
(2,227 posts)I don't care if it was gotten improperly. If that is the case, the judge could refuse to admit it as evidence.
But DESTROY IT???
It makes no sense... unless there is an agenda at play. No case should have an "agenda", only the search for truth, which is difficult if the evidence has been destroyed.
Turbineguy
(37,285 posts)On the way to the shredder the files fell into the hands of the Washington Post!
FM123
(10,053 posts)I guess he knew this was coming.
This relates to Alan Dershowitz. He was trying to see all these files, and Giuffre's lawyers were denying him access. Now Dershowitz won't be able to get hold of them through Giuffre.