Epstein Secrets

k at the Fowler White files. Then there's 24 THE COURT: That was the litigation lad by :4 a two-week delay between looking at the Fowler 25 Mr. Scherer. ,5 White files and receiving the disk. Md then Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793837 17 19 I there's a tam-weak dela

114:6 114:12,15,24 115:8,20 116:18 117:6,9 118:1 119:15,24 Scarola's 36:9 scheduled 6:7 schedules 119:20 scheduling 43:22 scheme 17:9 95:9 Scherer 14:25 15:2 15:3,9,1018:18 18:20 19:2,11 Scope 3:12,17 score 94:1 I Scott 1:8 2:5 38:19 39:20 57:7 113:9 scrambling 73:4 screen 56:8 screenin

client .• II variety of cases. It wan the entire contents of It So it was obvious that whet wes to happen at Ix the e-mail server of Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler, 12 that point was they were to take over the 17 and it was recognized that those e- could 13 ninisteriol task es officers of the cour

k at the Fowler White files. Then there's 24 THE COURT: That was the litigation lad by :4 a two-week delay between looking at the Fowler 25 Mr. Scherer. ,5 White files and receiving the disk. Md then Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793790 17 19 I there's a tam-weak dela

114:6 114:12,15,24 115:8,20 116:18 117:6,9 118:1 119:15,24 Scarola's 36:9 scheduled 6:7 schedules 119:20 scheduling 43:22 scheme 17:9 95:9 Scherer 14:25 15:2 15:3,9,1018:18 18:20 19:2,11 Scope 3:12,17 score 94:1 I Scott 1:8 2:5 38:19 39:20 57:7 113:9 scrambling 73:4 screen 56:8 screenin

client .• II variety of cases. It wan the entire contents of It So it was obvious that whet wes to happen at Ix the e-mail server of Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler, 12 that point was they were to take over the 17 and it was recognized that those e- could 13 ninisteriol task es officers of the cour

November of 23 2009. 24 Q Approximately 18 months -- about year and a 25 half? represented another law firm in a breakup of firma 2 And the Scherer firm waa owed over a million 4 5 4 7 • In Coos. And the client, the other law firm, was reneging on paying that. And Scherer won at the tria

even though the offices I worked II before you would file it, right? 12 out of wore in Miami. And I have heard of the Conrad 12 A Right. 13 Scherer firm throughout my practice. II Q Would you note every single fact that 14 4) You said one of the things in your direct 14 existed at the tim

noon or evening, and I went to that. 10 So there were probably about seven or IL eight or nine of u➢ there. Somebody -- maybe Stuart 12 13 IS Rosenfeldt -- had already hired Kendall Coffey, who was -- Kendall la a Miami attorney. Kendall and I practiced together at Greenberg Traurig in the '70a. Ke

e bankruptcy estate. 11 The second thing would be there's already at 12 least one pending suit that I know is in this 13 division, filed by Mr. Scherer. There probably 14 will be others that will come before you. As long 15 as they don't name the debtor and they don't 16 involve the assets, whi

21 you'd like. 22 MR. STETTIN: Jurisdiction, in fact, is in 23 the bankruptcy court over the assets of the debtor. 2 4 That's the Rothstein, Rosenfeldt and Adler firm. 25 This Court's continuing jurisdiction will be, 4 .61111•••••• (561) 832-7500 2 (Pages 2 to 5) PROSE COURT REPORTING AGENCY,

Funding, LLC, et al. v. Scott W Rothstein, et al., Case No. 09-062943 ("Razorback Complaint"), on behalf of some of the Pont scheme investors. Mr. Scherer asserted the following in the Razorback Complaint at pages 16-17 regarding the Epstein cases: In certain instances, the purported settlements, albe

4) fraud. Epstein's complaint set forth details of a Pont scheme that Edwards, Rothstein, and others perpetrated through their law firm, Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, and Adler, P.A. ("RRA"). (It 1-36).' The scheme included fraudulent promises to investors of multi-million dollar recoveries against Epstein from v

27:17 23:6 42:8 spectrum (1) 12 NI (2) schemes (1) set (5) sir (6) 54:11 1:24 62:18 18:16 6:15,16,18 5:12,18,22 6:9 split (3) RRA (2) Scherer (1) 37:25 54:21 21:1,9 3:13 46:15,19 37:11 44:3 19:6 sets (3) sitting (4) stage (3) RRA's (1) SCI (3) 25:21 37:21 43:8,9 52:10,11 35:10

pon Epstein's justifiable belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individuals, and other unknown partners of theirs at Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler, engaged in serious misconduct involving a widely publicized illegal Ponzi scheme operated through their law firm. Rothstein himself admitte