HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021870.jpg

Oo O DN OO FF WwW NY = NO RO PRP LP PNMO NO | S| S| |S FS FS S| S| | | no Bb WO NO F- ODO OO WDNnN DO OT BP WO NYO — 47] action was filed back in 2007 at a time when Mr. Edwards, and a couple days later, I did not know that there was a nonprosecution agreement that had been entered into between the U.S. Government and Jeffrey Epstein giving immunity to Epstein, four named women, and any other potential co-conspirators for sexually abusing minors over an extended period of time. And Mr. Edwards and a couple days later I, we filed -- it was a petition seeking to get access to the nonprosecution agreement and also seeking to invalidate that agreement, which essentially, gave immunity to at least five and potentially, you Know, many more persons from federal prosecution for federal sex crimes. When the pleading was filed in the District Court, what happened I believe was that the -- you know, it was styled as a petition and the clerk refused to set set an emergency hearing so I think there's a hand-scrawled notation that it's an emergency hearing. And at that point it went into the court and I believe the court gave it a civil caption. The caption that we see reflected here, it's 9:08-CV-80736, and it's a civil case. However the ultimate aim of the action is to try to invalidate a nonprosecution agreement and allow criminal prosecution. Now, our position, as I understand it, and as ROUGH DRAFT ONLY HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021870