Epstein Secrets

ssible "Reg D" violation-evidently he had lent money to his closest friend. (In the 1989 deposition he said that he'd lent approximately $20,000 to Warren Eisenstein, to buy stock.) Such an action could have been considered improper, although Epstein claimed he had not realized this until afterward. According t

depose him." "From the government's discovery in the main sentencing against Hoffenberg it would seem the government was perhaps a bit lazy," says David Lewis, who represented Mitchell Brater. "They went for what they knew they could get ... and that was the fraudulent promissory notes (i.e., the much lar

possible “Reg D” violation—evidently he had lent money to his closest friend. (In the 1989 deposition he said that he’d lent approximately $20,000 to Warren Eisenstein, to buy stock.) Such an action could have been considered improper, although Epstein claimed he had not realized this until afterward. According to

o depose him.” “From the government’s discovery in the main sentencing against Hoffenberg it would seem the government was perhaps a bit lazy,” says David Lewis, who represented Mitchell Brater. “They went for what they knew they could get ... and that was the fraudulent promissory notes [i.e., the much large

sible "Reg D" violation-evidently he had lent money to his closest friend. (In the 1989 deposition he said that he'd lent approxi- mately $20,000 to Warren Eisenstein, to buy stock.) Such an action could have been considered improper, although Epstein claimed he had not realized this un- til afterward. According

depose him." "From the government's discovery in the main sentencing against Hoffenberg it would seem the government was perhaps a bit lazy," says David Lewis, who repre- sented Mitchell Brater. "They went for what they knew they could get ... and that was the fraudulent promissory notes (i.e., the much la

possible “Reg D” violation—evidently he had lent money to his closest friend. (In the 1989 deposition he said that he’d lent approximately $20,000 to Warren Eisenstein, to buy stock.) Such an action could have been considered improper, although Epstein claimed he had not realized this until afterward. According to

o depose him.” “From the government’s discovery in the main sentencing against Hoffenberg it would seem the government was perhaps a bit lazy,” says David Lewis, who represented Mitchell Brater. “They went for what they knew they could get ... and that was the fraudulent promissory notes [i.e., the much large