Epstein Secrets

ttorney, ho also had clients. The Searcy Denney, who is a prominent firm, had clients as well against Kr. Epstein. And I believe an attorney named Adam Horowitz also. Those are attorneys that I recall had similar cases I 2 3 4 I 7 10 II 12 13 14 IS It 11 IS 34 compensatory damages, as well a

law firm that 20 was representing Mr. Epstein while you were involved? 21 A well, lack Goldberger and the Luttier firm, I 22 believe. 33 0 Bob Critton. 24 A Critton. 23 0 Dld you know Bob Critton? Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00798358 89 91 A Causally. 2 0 What

ecord.) MR. CRITTON: Let's get started. MR. EDWARDS: Brad Edwards, and I represent Jane Doe. ' MR. HILL: Jack Hill, on behalf (AM. MR. HOROWITZ: Adam Horowitz, on behalf of Jane Does 2 through 8. MR. LANGINO: Adam Langino, on behalf of B.B. MR. CRITTON: Bob Critton, on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. MR EDW

k Hill, on behalf (AM. MR. HOROWITZ: Adam Horowitz, on behalf of Jane Does 2 through 8. MR. LANGINO: Adam Langino, on behalf of B.B. MR. CRITTON: Bob Critton, on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. MR EDWARDS: And, Mr. Critton, I don't think we've had this Cant Reporter before, so maybe we want to instruct as t

.15500 09/18/2009 Jacquie Johnson Katherine Ezell RE:Deposition of Jean Luc Bruhnel Joint W/P Priv. 15501.15555 09/18/2009 Jacquie Johnson Adam Horowitz RE:Epstein Depo Joint W/P Priv. 15556-15564 09/22/2009 Jacquie Johnson Margaret Berk Epstein Depos Joint W/P Priv. 15565.15575 09/25/2009 Jacq

edes C. Estrada Doe v. Epstein Joint-privilege 02044 09/04/2009 Katherine W. Ezell Bradley J. Edwards E.W., Doe v. Epstein — Letter from Bob Critton Joint-privilege 02048 09/04/2009 Robert C. Josefsberg Bradley J. Edwards E.W., Doe v. Epstein — Letter from Bob Critton Joint-privilege 0

ivilege; Irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence; protected by privacy rights 01603 10/15/2009 Adam Horowitz Testimony RE: Vehicles W/P; Attorney Client Privilege; Irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence; pr

client privilege; irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible evidence; protected by privacy rights from Bob Critton 02049-02053 09/04/2009 Doe v. Epstein — Letter Work product; attorney/client privilege; irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to t

-15500 09/18/2009 Jacquie Johnson Katherine Ezell RE:Deposition of Jean Luc Bruhnel Joint W/P Priv. 15501.15555 09/18/2009 Jacquie Johnson Adam Horowitz RE:Epstein Depo Joint W/P Priv. 15556-15564 09/22/2009 Jacquie Johnson Margaret Berk Epstein Depos Joint W/P Priv. 15565-15575 09/25/2009 Jacq

. Estrada Doe v. Epstein Joint-privilege 02044 09/04/2009 Katherine W. Ezell Bradley J. Edwards Doe v. Epstein — Joint-privilege e er r m Bob Critton 02048 09/04/2009 Robert C. Josefsberg Bradley J. Edwards Doe v. Epstein — Joint-privilege Letter from Bob Critton 02054 05/12/2009 Spence