Epstein Secrets

epose him." "Front the government's discovery in the main sentencing against HotTenberg it wculd 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 la

Michael (Mickey) Tarnopol and Alvin Einbender. In his 1989 deposition Ep- stein recalled that the partner who had made an "issue' of the matter was Marvin David- son. On March 9. Epstein said. he had met with Tarnopol and Einbender again. and the two partners ;cid him that the executive com- mittee ha

depose him." "From the government's discovery in the main sentencing against Hoffenberg it would seem the paemment was Pk:titans a bee hat:- says David Lewis. who represented Mitchell Bracer. "Thev went for what they knew they. could get ... and that was the fraudulent promissory notes the much larger a

n 2003 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE Alvin Einbentler.ln his 1989 deposition Ep- stein recalled that the partner who had made an "issue" of the matter was Marvin David- son. On March 9. Epstein said. he had met with Tarnow/ and Einbender again, and the two punnets told hint that the menthe com- mittee had we

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

andr in7S M ar ainAl— • Q. Alvin Einbender. In his 1989 deposition Ep- stein recalled that the partner who had made an "issue" of the matter was Marvin David- eon. On March R Epstein said he had met with Tarnopol and Einbender again, and the two partners told him that the matabet corn- miner had we

depose him." "From the government's discovery in the main sentencing against HotTenberg 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 the much larger

The questioners. Epstein nnA Alvin Einbender.-In his 1989 deposition Ep- stein recalled that the partner who had made an issue" of the matter was Marvin David- son. On March 9. Epstein said. he had met with Ternopol and Einbender :min. and the two partners told hint that the executwe com- mittee had

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

ned him about the loan _ . Alvin Einbender.. In his 1989 deposition Ep- stein recalled that the partner who had made an "issue" of the matter was Marvin David- son. On March 9. Epstein said. he had met with Tarnopol and Einbendcr again. and the two partners told him that the oxalate com- mittee had

epose him:" ""From the government's discovery in the main sentencing against HotTenberg it would seem the government was perhaps a bit lazy.- says David Lewis. who represented Mitchell Bracer. "They went for what they knew they could get ... and that was the fraudulent promissory notes [i.e.. the much la

) Tarnopol and u1.11r-u Inn, Alvin Einbender. In his 1989 deposition Ep- stein recalled that the partner who had made an "issue" of the matter was Marvin David- son. On March 9. Epstein said. he had met with Tarnopol and Einbender again, and the two partners told him that the executive com- mittee ha