Epstein Secrets

, I believed at the time of filing my original Complaint that these two individuals, and other unknown partners of theirs at Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler ("RRA"), engaged in serious misconduct involving a widely publicized illegal Ponzi scheme operated through their law firm (the "Ponzi Scheme") tha

Razorback Funding, LLC, et al. v. Scott W Rothstein, et al., Case No. 09-062943(19); deposition of Scott W Rothstein in In re: Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, PA; 09-34791-RBR and Razorback Funding, LLC, et al. v. Scott W Rothstein, et al., Case No. 09-062943(19); letter dated July 22, 2009 from Edwards,

nces to supporting documentation. (R. 808-818). Those facts, along with the references as footnotes, are recounted below. Edwards was a partner at Rothstein Rosenfeld Adler ("RRA") from April 2009 through November 2009.' During that time, his firm was a front for the largest Ponzi scheme in Florida's history,2 and RRA,

d other media outlets reported that Scott Rothstein had fled to Morocco to evade criminal prosecution for using his law firm, Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler ("RRA"), to perpetrate a massive Ponzi scheme. It was widely reported that RRA, Rothstein and other conspirators whose identities had not yet been

connection whatsoever to any specific claims of misconduct against the plaintiffs in the Epstein Cases. See letter dated 6 Edwards was a partner at Rothstein Rosenfeld Adler ("RRA") from April 2009 through November 2009, which was during the same period when, according to the Razorback Complaint, the Epstein cases were

urisdiction over RRA rests in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida in the case of In Re: Rothstein, Rosenfeld and Adler, Case No. 09- 34791-BKC-RER. This Court has effectively recognized as much in a prior subpoena issued upon Mr. Stettin, RBA's Trustee. Moreover, the

individually, and L.M., individually, Defendants. MOTION FOR FROTECTIVE ORDER FOR HERBERT STETTIN, TRUSTEE Herbert Stettin, Chapter 11 Trustee of Rothstein Rosenfeld Adler, P.A., ("RRA") hereby moves for a Protective Order as to a Subpoena issued upon him for records to be produced by March 16, 2011 and states: 1. F

well-founded belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individuals, and other unknown partners of theirs at Rothstein. Rosenfeldt. Adler ("RRA"), engaged in serious misconduct involving a widely publicized illegal Ponzi scheme operated through their law firm (the "Ponzi scheme"). Roth

were the facts upon which Epstein relied as requisite cause to assert his causes of action against Rothstein and Edwards: Edwards was a partner at Rothstein Rosenfeld Adler ("RRA") from April 2009 through November 2009. During that time, his firm was a front for the largest Ponzi scheme in Florida's history. Also durin

well-founded belief at the time of filing his Complaint that these two individuals, and other unknown partners of theirs at Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler ("RRA"), engaged in serious misconduct involving a widely publicized illegal Ponzi scheme operated through their law firm (the "Ponzi scheme"). Roth

were the facts upon which Epstein relied as requisite cause to assert his causes of action against Rothstein and Edwards: Edwards was a partner at Rothstein Rosenfeld Adler ("RRA") from April 2009 through November 2009. During that time, his firm was a front for the largest Ponzi scheme in Florida's history. Also durin

othstein, the partner of plaintiff Brad Edwards, had fled to Morocco to evade criminal prosecution for using their law firm, Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Adler ("RRA"), to perpetrate a massive Ponzi scheme. It was widely reported that RRA, Rothstein, Rothstein's partners and other co-conspirators whose iden

ims of RRA's fraudulent scheme described in the Razorback Complaint received $170,000,000 to settle their claims. [Cite] 6 Edwards was a partner at Rothstein Rosenfeld Adler ("RRA") from April 2009 through November 2009, which was during the same period when, according to the Razorback Complaint, the fraudulent pleading