Epstein Secrets

uments identified on his 159-page privilege log. In addition, Edwards' counsel suggested that Link & Rockenbach received the evidence from attorney William Scherer (Razorback's counsel). Although that is inaccurate, it demonstrates that any potential work-product protection has been waived by virtue of producti

jury from case-eviscerating e-mails would result in reversible error and lead to a second trial. Because these e-mails are case-ending or worse for Edwards, Edwards has attacked Epstein's counsel and derided the truth of these e-mails in an attempt to hide them from the light of the courtroom, but in the end, t

his reliance upon such a report from a single credible victim or eyewitness sufficient to demonstrate for probable cause: "Ft. Lauderdale attorney William Scherer represents multiple Rothstein related investors. He indicated in an article that RRA/Rothstein had used "the Epstein ploy ... as a showpiece as bait

rounds for suspicion, which were in abundance on the facts cited by Epstein. 20 EFTA00799358 For example, at the time Epstein filed suit against Edwards, Edwards neither disputed nor provided any explanation for filing a federal lawsuit against Epstein on behalf of one of the clients for whom Edwards had alr

his reliance upon such a report from a single credible victim or eyewitness sufficient to demonstrate for probable cause: "Ft. Lauderdale attorney William Scherer represents multiple Rothstein related investors. He indicated in an article that RRA/Rothstein had used "the Epstein ploy ... as a showpiece as bait

grounds for suspicion, which were in abundance on the facts cited by Epstein. 24 EFTA00583975 For example, at the time Epstein filed suit against Edwards, Edwards neither disputed nor provided any explanation for filing the duplicative federal lawsuit against Epstein on behalf LM, of one of the clients for wh