Epstein Secrets

ers. Whether or not Fowler White and/or Epstein complied with that directive is squarely and appropriately before the court that issued the Order — the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida. 2See March 8, 2018, Afternoon Hearing Transcript, 62:6-12 (Court allowed Epstein to file the exhibits under

federal civil contempt relating to the alleged violations of the November 2010 Agreed Order. Specifically, Edwards may take the depositions of (1) Fowler White's representative about the chain of custody of the discovery documents; (2) Epstein about his knowledge or possession of the disc or documents pre-20

filed his Supplement to the Motion to Strike, which identified a Federal Court Order issued on November 30, 2010 by the Honorable Raymond B. Ray of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, prohibiting Epstein's prior counsel, Fowler White, from creating or retaining the CD in question, and reservin

in any copies of the documents contained on the discs provided to it, nor shall any images or copies of said documents be retained in the memory of Fowler White's copiers. Should it be determined that Fowler White or Epstein retained images or copies of the subject documents on its computer or otherwise, the

n exists because the Razorback victims were outspokenly not aligned with Edwards. This is perhaps best illustrated in the hearing transcript before the United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Florida, Case No. 09-34791-BKC- RBR, in In re Rothstein Rosenfeld! Adler, P.A., in which the following were statements made by

bate stamped pages of documents. Rather, Special Master Carney wanted a searchable disc. It is still a mystery how and when the disc came back into Fowler White's possession after it was sent to Special Master Carney and no evidence has been presented to resolve that question definitively. 5Excerpts of the Ma