| Epstein Victim Jane Doe 3
Sued Indyke Now CSAM Objectors as
New Case Filed
by
Matthew Russell Lee,
Patreon Book
Substack SDNY
COURTHOUSE,
Sept 16รข€“ Jane Doe 3 sued
Jeffrey Epstein's lawyer
Darren Indyke and accountant
Richard Kahn for their role in
Epstein's rape, sexual assault
and sex
trafficking. On
November 6, U.S. District
Court for the Southern
District of New York Judge
Arun Subramanian held a public
proceeding, and Inner City
Press live tweeted it. From
the thread: Judge
Subramanian: OK, we'll address
the request to depose Doe's
husband Plaintiff's lawyer: Ms. Doe does not want her husband to know about this. So we are willing at trial to drop claims having to do with harm to the marriage. Jane Doe had not told anyone... Judge:
Defendants, what do you want
to ask? Defense counsel:
He dated her before the
Epstein time, before her
return to [voluntarily
redacted here - see Substack
below the line here].
They got married in 2017,
these alleged incidents took
place in 2014. Defense lawyer:
We got copies of her texts to
her now-husband, he had moved
to
[voluntarily
redacted here
- see Substack
below the line
here].
Jane Doe 3 appeared to be
having a fine time with
Epstein, Broadway shows and
the like. Substack here On December
20,2024 more bristling at
transparency, thread Jump cut to
December 1, 2025: the 513 page
Epstein Estate privilege log,
now on Patreon here Jump cut to
September 16, 2026 when, as in
one of the Epstein cases
before Judge Rakoff, the CSAM
issue has been raised. Sigrid
McCauly said it had been
considered, and in any event a
new case has been filed (which
Inner City Press reported on
yesterday here). But more was
said: Judge
Subramanian: I hear you to be
saying that $35 million may
not be enough, if the CSAM
victims were not considered.
Counsel: They weren't given
notice either. There is a
conflict of interest Judge:
Between the estate and the
executors? Counsel: Yes. Counsel: The
future of the survivors is at
stake. Judge: I've heard from
the objectors. Now, Ms.
McCauley? Sigrid McCauley:
That Epstein had photos on his
walls has been known for
years. She had filed her own
case, before Judge Woods. This
was considered But now it is
being considered by Judge
Subramanian. Watch this site. This case is Doe 3 v. Indyke, et al., 1:24-cv-1204 (Subramanian)
*** Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron. 
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com Mail: Box 130222, Chinatown Station,
NY NY 10013 Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540 Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis. Copyright 2006-2025 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com |
Investigative reporting from the inner city to Wall Street to the United Nations This is the blogspot version InnerCityPress.com