Epstein Secrets

Rothstein falsely informed the investors that the potential settlement agreements were available for purchase. Plea Agreement at 2, United States v. Scott W. Rothstein, No. 9-60331-CR- COHN (S.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2010) attached hereto as Exhibit "SS." 87. It has been alleged that among other cases that Rothstein used

in or about 2005, through in or about November 2009, Scott Rothstein appears to 32 EFTA00726030 have run a giant Ponzi scheme at his law firm of Rothstein, Rosenfeldt and Adler P.A. ("RRA"). This Ponzi scheme involved Rothstein falsely informing investors that settlement agreements had been reached wi

ess. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Epstein at Epstein's New Mexico Ranch. There was information indicating that Epstein had young girls at his ranch which, given the circumstances of the case, raised the reasonable infer

Rothstein falsely informed the investors that the potential settlement agreements were available for purchase. Plea Agreement at 2, United States v. Scott W. Rothstein, No. 9-60331-CR- 00HN (S.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2010) attached hereto as Exhibit "SS." 87. It has been alleged that among other cases that Rothstein used

d on FI_SD Docket 01/1/2.215 Page 35 of Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 1603b§ Filed 04/u44/11 Page 34 Ot 3V have run a giant Pont scheme at his law firm of Rothstein, Rosenfeldt and Adler P.A. ("RRA"). This Ponzi scheme involved Rothstein falsely informing investors that settlement agreements had been reached wi

ess. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Epstein at Epstein's New Mexico Ranch. There was information indicating that Epstein had young girls at his ranch which, given the circumstances of the case, raised the reasonable infer

Rothstein falsely informed the investors that the potential settlement agreements were available for purchase. Plea Agreement at 2, United States I Scott W. Rothstein, No. 9-60331-CR- COHN (S.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2010) attached hereto as Exhibit "SS." 87. It has been alleged that among other cases that Rothstein used

00188897 Case 9:08-cv-80C6st gsi-1346tuRrgwit 2en ofatergieocroF40 c. osa l'e)W 0,15 Page 35 of have run a giant Ponzi scheme at his law finn of Rothstein, Rosenfeldt and Adler P.A. ("RRA"). This Ponzi scheme involved Rothstein falsely informing investors that settlement agreements had been reached wi

ess. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Epstein at Epstein's New Mexico Ranch. There was information indicating that Epstein had young girls at his ranch which, given the circumstances of the case, raised the reasonable infer

nt with Epstein, as does his former partner Scott Rothstein, who’s now in prison for his role in a Ponzi sche

o’s a serial liar. Brad Edwards, one of the lawyers bringing this suit, has a history of legal entanglement with Epstein, as does his former partner Scott Rothstein, who’s now in prison for his role in a Ponzi scheme. But the other lawyer in this case, Paul Cassell, is a former federal judge and a law professor.

. These records prove incontrovertibly that I could not have been, and was not, where Roberts’ falsely claimed to have met me — a Caribbean Island, a New Mexico Ranch, a private jet, a Palm Beach mansion — during the relevant time period. I also called for an independent investigation by the former Director of th

CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, Vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendant, / DEFENDANT/COUNTER-PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAIN

laint he carries forth the essence of all claims asserted in his original Complaint. In that pleading Epstein essentially alleges that Edwards joined Rothstein in the abusive prosecution of sexual assault cases against Epstein to “pump” the cases to Ponzi scheme investors. The purported “proof” of the allega

Rothstein falsely informed the investors that the potential settlement agreements were available for purchase. Plea Agreement at 2, United States v. Scott W. Rothstein, No. 9-60331-CR-COHN (S.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2010) attached hereto as Exhibit “SS.” 87. It has been alleged that among other cases that Rothstein used t

cases. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein’s personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Epstein at Epstein’s New Mexico Ranch. See deposition of Larry Morrison, October 6, 2009, at 167-169. There was information indicating that Epstein had young girls at his ranch which, giv