Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 298 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2015 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 9:08-cv-80736-ICAM JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2. Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. VICTIMS' RESPONSE TO ORDER REQUESTING JUSTIFICATION FOR ESPTEIN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR A SUPPLEMENTAL PROTECTIVE ORDER COME NOW petitioners Jane Doe No. I and Jane Doe 2, as well as movants Jane Doe No. 3 and Jane Doe No. 4 ("the victims"'), to respond to the Court's Order Requesting Justification for Intervenor Epstein's Unopposed Motion for a Protective Order (DE 286). The victims believe that the motion should be denied. The only reason the victims' did not oppose the motion earlier was their (perhaps mistaken) belief that the Court had already directed that they were not to file the most recently-disclosed plea bargain correspondence in the public court file and that they must agree on protective order language with Epstein's attorneys. But in light of the Court's recent request for justification, the victims wish to reassert their position that the correspondence should be cited in the open court file. The victims also believe that Epstein's ' As promised in their pending motion to join (DE 280), Jane Doe No. 3 and Jane Doe No. 4 do not seek to expand the number of pleadings filed in this case. If allowed to join this action, they would simply support the pleadings already being filed by Jane Doe No. I and Jane Doe No. 2 — including this pleading. 1 EFTA00592714