Epstein Secrets

ren't comfortable. (DT 171:13) f. The above represent only a few of the dramatic changes L.M. made in her testimony prior to her representation by EDWARDS/RRA and after she hired ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and RRA. 48. As a result of the fraudulent investment or (Ponzi) scheme, L.M. may knowingly have compromise

Epstein as well as the improper litigation tactics outlined above) occurred within a five-year time period. 58. As a direct and proximate result of ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and L.M.'s violations of §772.103, Fla. Stat., EPSTEIN has been injured. 59. Pursuant to §772.104(1), Ha. Stat., Plaintiff EPSTEIN is entitled to t

ren't comfortable. (DT 171:13) f. The above represent only a few of the dramatic changes L.M. made in her testimony prior to her representation by EDWARDS/RRA and after she hired ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and RRA. 48. As a result of the fraudulent investment or (Ponzi) scheme, L.M. may knowingly have compromise

Epstein as well as the improper litigation tactics outlined above) occurred within a five-year time period. 58. As a direct and proximate result of ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and L.M.'s violations of §772.103, Fla. Stat., EPSTEIN has been injured. 59. Pursuant to §772.104(1), Fla. Stat., Plaintiff EPSTEIN is entitled to

s weren't comfortable. (DT 171:13) f. The above represent only a few of the dramatic changes made in her testimony prior to her representation by EDWARDS/RRA and after she hired ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and RRA. 48. As a result of the fraudulent investment or (Ponzi) scheme, may knowingly have compromised he

Epstein as well as the improper litigation tactics outlined above) occurred within a five-year time period. 58. As a direct and proximate result of ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and ■.'s violations of §772.103, Fla. Stat., EPSTEIN has been injured. 59. Pursuant to §772.104(1), Fla. Stat., Plaintiff EPSTEIN is entitled to th

weren't comfortable. (DT 171:13) f. The above represent only a few of the dramatic changes... made in her testimony prior to her representation by EDWARDS/RRA and after she hired ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and RRA. 48. As a result of the fraudulent investment or (Ponzi) scheme, may knowingly have compromised he

Epstein as well as the improper litigation tactics outlined above) occurred within a five-year time period. 58. As a direct and proximate result of ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and ■.'s violations of §772.103, Fla. Stat., EPSTEIN has been injured. 59. Pursuant to §772.104(1), Fla. Stat., Plaintiff EPSTEIN is entitled to th

ren't comfortable. (DT 171:13) 1. The above represent only a few of the dramatic changes L.M. made in her testimony prior to her representation by EDWARDS/RRA and after she hired ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and RRA. 48. As a result of the fraudulent investment or (Ponzi) scheme, L.M. may knowingly have compromise

TEIN, EDWARDS and L.M. possessed ulterior motives or purposes in exercising such illegal, improper, or perverted use of process. 72. As a result of ROTHSTEIN, EDWARDS and L.M.'s actions, EPSTEIN suffered damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff EPSTEIN respectfully demands the entry of a judgment for damages against all th