Powerful “John Doe” Begs Judge to Not Unseal Epstein Matter

Someone does not want the latest trove of Epstein documentation unsealed, and is scared enough to have hired a cadre of attorneys to appear in court on this Mr. John Doe’s behalf. According to the NY Post:

An anonymous man terrified he’s about to be named in court papers related to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s alleged child sex trafficking ring is begging a judge not to release his name and identities of others accused — because it could tarnish their reputations, according to a surprise motion filed Tuesday. …

…“As a non-party to these proceedings, Doe lacks specific knowledge about the contents of the Sealed Materials,” his lawyers wrote to Manhattan federal court judge Loretta Preska. “But it is clear that these materials implicate the privacy and reputational interests of many persons other than the two primary parties to this action, Giuffre and Maxwell.”

Sometimes the law proves to be the source of delicious irony. This “non-party” lacks knowledge as to the nature of the documents themselves, but certainly does have the knowledge that he is extremely vulnerable due to past associations with Epstein, and, presumably, a type of relationship that would at least “appear” to be wrong, if not criminal.

Does the terrified Mr. John Doe have any other basis to fear the impending release? Something a little more concrete? Why yes:

The letter goes on to say a prior judge overseeing the case summarized the still-secret documents as containing a “range of allegations of sexual acts involving Plaintiff and non-parties to this litigation, some famous, some not; the identities of non-parties who either allegedly engaged in sexual acts with Plaintiff or who allegedly facilitated such acts.”

Allegations of sexual acts with the Plaintiff (young woman) and non-parties (like possibly “John Doe”), including some engaged in sex acts? Yes, that would certainly tarnish someone’s reputation, though that is how we deal with people who predate on minor girls.

If Mr. Doe has been wrongly accused, he cannot hide behind simply stating “I didn’t do it.” The lawsuit is filed, he may not be named, but he will have to deal with the consequences. He is perfectly free to join the lawsuit and fight to clear himself, indeed he can sue the Plaintiff for damages (she is about to become quite wealthy anyway) should he be falsely accused.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. The trove of documents set to be released, possibly as early as today, contain 5-10 times more volume than those previously released according to David Boies, the plaintiff’s attorney in this matter.

Giuffre claims she was also ordered to sleep with a rotating door of high-powered men, including the late MIT professor Marvin Minsky, former Maine Sen. George Mitchell, ex-New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, money manager Glenn Dubin and lawyer Alan Dershowitz.

No one can claim that Epstein was partisan in his dealings, since that list – not in any way proven – includes two prominent Democrats. But, the larger point is that the above names are men already listed within the public domain. None of the men above are “John Doe” (or it is highly unlikely) because it would be unnecessary to file anonymously. The third party “John Doe” is someone yet to be named within documents.

It could be near anyone, except for men who were never in the presence of Epstein, Maxell, or this young woman. Those of us fitting that definition are not in New York seeking to block the release.

Whatever happens, we are likely to find out today whether the judge sympathizes with Mr. Doe:

NEW: Judge Preska schedules a conference early on Sept. 4 to plan unsealing the remainder of Epstein-related files in Giuffre v. Maxwell. pic.twitter.com/jE8EYwJwUO

— Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) August 9, 2019

****

Peace, y’all

Jason

[email protected]