Epstein Secrets

you represented Jane Doe. .. whether she was considered a victim by the U.S. Attorney's Office?" and then re-phrased: ". . .[D]id you learn whether [Jane Doe 1] was listed as a, or deemed to be a victim by the U.S. Attorney's Office?" Id. at 100-104. Although contrary to law, Mr. Scarola's stated position

ROLA: I am going to object. That calls for attorney-client privilege. 100/9-14 Q. At the time do you know whether, at the time that you represented Jane Doe 1, do you know whether her name, whether she was considered a victim by the United States Attorney's Office? 100/15-23 A. SCAROLA: If that informati

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Judge David F. Crow JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants. NOTICE OF HEARING (Specially Se

perfield and Bill Richardson for deposition en 70-75); purported relevancy of pilot and flight logs to show interstate airplane travel in support of Jane Doe's Federal Rico claims and punitive damages (911 77-79); Epstein's interview with a New York newspaper reporter (9191 80-81); Epstein's alleged threat

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION AG CASE NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMB Judge David F. Crow JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaint

asserting liens against recoveries in: a. b. c. L.M. v. Epstein, Case No. 502008CA028051)OOO(MB E.W. v. Epstein, Case No. 502008CA028058XXXXMB Jane Doe v, Epstein, Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON Certificate of Service I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was sent by fax and U.S. Ma

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Judge David F. Crow JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants. NOTICE OF HEARING (Specially Se

f then-minor girls in his Palm Beach mansion in the Southern District of Florida and elsewhere. Several of these victims, including L.M., E.W., and "Jane Doe," were represented by Farmer Jaffe attorney Bradley J. Edwards in their civil suits against Epstein. [DE 1120]. 2. Edwards filed the three sexual

sor to Judge Crow). As it has evolved, Epstein's lawsuit against Edwards was dismissed and the lawsuit now 3 Specifically, on April 10, 2012, Judge David F. Crow (presiding over the Epstein lawsuit) entered an Order requiring Edwards to produce any non-privileged documents identified in paragraph 13 of Epste

s specific claims against Edwards do not give Edwards carte blanche to inquire into any and all sexual conduct and related matters. Nor do the and Jane Doe cases that Edwards filed — which settled — open the door to such expansive and entirely irrelevant discovery, or give Edwards the right to ask Epst

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION AG CASE NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMB Judge David F. Crow JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaint

Ponzi scheme, RRA was also engaged in litigation against Epstein in three civil cases. The cases were Jane Doe v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CIV- 80893 ("Jane Doe"), U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida; L.M. v. Epstein ("LM"), Case No. 50-2008 CA 028051XXXXMB-AB; and E.W. v. Epstein ("EW" or "Jan

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO. 502009CA040800X.XXXMB-AG Judge David F. Crow JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants. SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT The P

Ponzi scheme, RRA was also engaged in litigation against Epstein in three civil cases. The cases were Jane Doe v. Epstein, Case No. 08-CIV- 80893 ("Jane Doe"), U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida; L.M. v. Epstein ("LM"), Case No. 50-2008 CA 028051XXXXMB-AB; and E.W. v. Epstein ("EW" or "Jan

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO. 502009CA040800X.XXXMB-AG Judge David F. Crow JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants. SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT The P

f in deposition which had no legitimate baring on the case or the issues to be tried, including questions regarding size of his genitalia; (4) In Jane Doe 2, Edwards represented in pleading to the federal Magistrate that records of communications by and between the United States Government and Epstein's

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO. 502009CA040800X.XXXMB-AG Judge David F. Crow JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants. AMENDED COMPLAINT The Plaintif