Epstein Secrets

uit, which will be the second amended complaint and third evolution of the lawsuit. Epstein also named Edwards’ former boss, convicted Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein, in the lawsuit, alleging Rothstein made “various representations to potential investors regarding the Epstein actions.” In dismissing the lawsuit,

laint and third evolution of the lawsuit. Epstein also named Edwards’ former boss, convicted Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein, in the lawsuit, alleging Rothstein made “various representations to potential investors regarding the Epstein actions.” In dismissing the lawsuit, Crow said he found “serious problems

attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein to prevent parties in a civil lawsuit involving the billionaire sex offender from talking to the media. Circuit Judge David Crow denied the motion for a gag order. In addition, Crow dismissed the complaint by Epstein against attorney Brad Edwards, who has represented 10 undera

JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J, EDWARDS, individually. Defendants. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH C

JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J, EDWARDS, individu

ed Jeffrey Epstein, who being sworn, states the following: I am the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant in this matter and I am moving to disqualify Judge David Crow. I have, after discussions with my attorney and witnesses, as well as reading the transcript of this hearing, instructed my attorney to file this Mo

E STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT Appellate Case No.: 4D18-0762 LT Case No: 502009CA040800XXXXMB AG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Petitioner/Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Respondents/Defendants. PETITIONER'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT BRADLEY J. EDWARDS

EFFREY EPSTEIN, Petitioner/Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individua

er, the trial court refused to evaluate these issues, choosing instead to exclude 'In a May 7, 2012, Order, a predecessor trial judge, the Honorable David Crow, found the privilege log to be insufficient on its face and not in compliance with the requirements of Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280(v)(5) and Tigg Ins. Co

nt prosecution agreement with Edwards' counsel, whereby both parties agreed to share information relative to their claims and/or defenses related to Scott Rothstein without waiving privilege as to their communications or documents shared." Edwards' Supp. Resp. to Epstein's Mot. to Declare Relevance, July 26, 201

in this action about his anxiety over being sued by Epstein They also directly relate to Edwards' interaction with Ponzi-schemer Scott Rothstein ("Rothstein") and the strengthAveakness of Edwards' clients' damage claims against Epstein, both which have become critical factual issues in this case. First

ncealed their existence by hiding them within a deceptively worded I ,607-entry, 159-page privilege log that this Court's predecessor, The Honorable David Crow, found to be insufficient on its face and not-compliant with the requirements of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(5)7 and TIG Ins. Corp. v.

MAN Dora Raton Fort Lomat:Sale Worn, Tallahassee hi, EFTA00616223 MAR-15-2011 TUE 05:39 PM FAX NO. P. 03/07 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendants. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15711 JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND F

and states: 1. First, jurisdiction over RRA rests in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida in the case of In Re: Rothstein, Rosenfeld and Adler, Case No. 09- 34791-BKC-RER. This Court has effectively recognized as much in a prior subpoena issued upon Mr. Stettin, RBA's T

Beach County Courthouse, located at 205 North Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, Florida as follows: DATE: March 28, 2011 TIME: 8:45 a.m. JUDGE: David Crow ROOM: 9C SPECIFIC MATTERS TO BE HEARD: MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER FOR HERBERT STETTIN, TRUSTEE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a bona fide effort has bee

e fabrications." The hearing was related to Epstein's lawsuit against Edwards, alleging Edwards was involved in false claims made by Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein. Epstein says Rothstein lured investors to his scheme by telling them Epstein had agreed to settle sex abuse lawsuits for as much as $200 million.

was related to Epstein's lawsuit against Edwards, alleging Edwards was involved in false claims made by Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein. Epstein says Rothstein lured investors to his scheme by telling them Epstein had agreed to settle sex abuse lawsuits for as much as $200 million. Edwards worked at Rothst

wsuit last month against Epstein on behalf of victim M.J., asking for $50 million in damages. At a court hearing Friday, Scarola told Circuit Judge David Crow that all lawsuits were settled for "very substantial sums of money, which is directly contrary to the assertions that Mr. Epstein made that these c

il 22, 2013 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS The Honorable David Crow Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 • • Highway West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Re: Epstein v. Rothstein. et at Dear Judge Crow: elephone facsimile As discussed in Court this morning, enclosed please find copies of the following two United States Su

TONJA HADDAD, PA Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 April 22, 2013 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS The Honorable David Crow Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 • • Highway West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Re: Epstein v. Rothstein. et at Dear Judge Crow: elephone facsimile A