Epstein case: Jane Doe 107 faces Monday deadline in anonymity battle

(NewsNation) — Monday marks a critical deadline in the high-profile Jeffrey Epstein case. The person identified as Jane Doe 107 must prove that if her name is released, it would cause her irrevocable harm.

It’s still not confirmed if Doe 107 is an accuser or an associate.

But by the end of the day Monday, her attorney must provide documentation explaining why their client’s safety could be at risk if her name is released.

They must also provide details about the hate mail she’s already received.

Just ahead of the release of the Epstein documents, Doe 107’s attorney Richard Levitt wrote a letter to the judge detailing his clients’ fears, reading in part, ”As Doe 107 has previously stated, she lives outside the United States in a culturally conservative country and lives in fear of her name being released.”

He further implied that she may face social stigma, harassment or even threats to her safety if her connection to the Epstein case is made known.

This comes after thousands of pages of documents, and more than 150 associates and accusers connected to the late convicted pedophile and financier have been released and named over the last couple of weeks.

Some names in the documents include former President Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, former President Donald Trump and Epstein’s attorney Alan Dershowitz.

“2008 is when he was convicted. Anybody who associated with him before that time kind of deserves the benefit of the doubt in my view,” Matt Murphy, a personal injury and criminal defense attorney, said. “Anybody afterward, once we have dates — I want to see who is seeing him, who was hanging out with him, who was socializing with him after everyone knew he was a pedophile.”

It is not clear if Doe 107’s affidavit has been filed yet and whether it will be made public.

Related articles

A reckoning awaits these out-of-touch lawmakers hopelessly in denial



Last month, some House members publicly acknowledged that Israel has been committing genocide in Gaza. It’s a judgment that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch unequivocally proclaimed a year ago. Israeli human-rights organizations have reached the same conclusion. But such clarity is sparse in Congress.

And no wonder. Genocide denial is needed for continuing to appropriate billions of dollars in weapons to Israel, as most legislators have kept doing. Congress members would find it very difficult to admit that Israeli forces are committing genocide while voting to send them more weaponry.

Three weeks ago, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) introduced a resolution titled “Recognizing the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza.” Twenty-one House colleagues, all of them Democrats, signed on as co-sponsors. They account for 10 percent of the Democrats in Congress.

In sharp contrast, a national Quinnipiac Poll found that 77 percent of Democrats “think Israel is committing genocide.” That means there is a 67 percent gap between what the elected Democrats are willing to say and what the people who elected them believe. The huge gap has big implications for the party’s primaries in the midterm elections next year, and then in the race for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination.

One of the likely candidates in that race, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), is speaking out in ways that fit with the overwhelming views of Democratic voters.

“I agree with the UN commission's heartbreaking finding that there is a genocide in Gaza,” he tweeted as autumn began. “What matters is what we do about it – stop military sales that are being used to kill civilians and recognize a Palestinian state.”

Consistent with that position, the California congressman was one of the score of Democrats who signed on as co-sponsors of Tlaib’s resolution the day it was introduced.

In the past, signers of such a resolution would have reason to fear the wrath — and the electoral muscle — of AIPAC, the Israel-can-do-no-wrong lobby. But its intimidation power is waning. AIPAC’s support for Israel does not represent the views of the public, a reality that has begun to dawn on more Democratic officeholders.

“With American support for the Israeli government’s management of the conflict in Gaza undergoing a seismic reversal, and Democratic voters’ support for the Jewish state dropping off steeply, AIPAC is becoming an increasingly toxic brand for some Democrats on Capitol Hill,” the New York Times reported this fall. Notably, “some Democrats who once counted AIPAC among their top donors have in recent weeks refused to take the group’s donations.”

Khanna has become more and more willing to tangle with AIPAC, which is now paying for attack ads against him.

On Thanksgiving, he tweeted about Gaza and accused AIPAC of “asking people to disbelieve what they saw with their own eyes.” Khanna elaborated in a campaign email days ago, writing: “Any politician who caves to special interests on Gaza will never stand up to special interests on corruption, healthcare, housing, or the economy. If we can’t speak with moral clarity when thousands of children are dying, we won’t stand for working Americans when corporate power comes knocking.”

AIPAC isn’t the only well-heeled organization for Israel now struggling with diminished clout. Democratic Majority for Israel, an offshoot of AIPAC that calls itself “an American advocacy group that supports pro-Israel policies within the United States Democratic Party,” is now clearly misnamed. Every bit of recent polling shows that in the interests of accuracy, the organization should change its name to “Democratic Minority for Israel.”

Yet the party’s leadership remains stuck in a bygone era. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), the chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, typifies how disconnected so many party leaders are from the actual views of Democratic voters. Speaking in Brooklyn three months ago, she flatly claimed that “nine out of 10 Democrats are pro-Israel.” She did not attempt to explain how that could be true when more than seven out of 10 Democrats say Israel is guilty of genocide.

The political issue of complicity with genocide will not go away.

Last week, Amnesty International released a detailed statement documenting that “Israeli authorities are still committing genocide against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip, by continuing to deliberately inflict conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction.” But in Congress, almost every Republican and a large majority of Democrats remain stuck in public denial about Israel’s genocidal policies.

Such denial will be put to the electoral test in Democratic primaries next year, when most incumbents will face an electorate far more morally attuned to Gaza than they are. What easily passes for reasoned judgment and political smarts in Congress will seem more like cluelessness to many Democratic activists and voters who can provide reality checks with their ballots.

Fact-checking claims about Border Patrol’s immigration crackdown in North Carolina

Border Patrol affecting NC traffic? Jails blocking access to inmates? Fact-checking claims about crackdown in NC

The Surreal Madness of the AI Boom

TPM Reader EB emailed today to tell me something that hadn’t come across my radar: the cost of computer memory...