Epstein Secrets

ned herein including, but not limited to, the discovery abuses and bad faith litigation tactics that Epstein has been the subject of at the hands of Scott Rothstein and his-co-conspirators, any tax returns must be redacted to preserve confidently and to prevent further abuses. See supra. Further, Epstein's com

ermore, as set forth in a Civil Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit ar attorney Scott Rothstein aided by other lawyers and employees at the firm of Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, and Adler, P.A., deliberately engaged in a pattern of racketeering that involved a staggering series of gravely serious obstructions o

safe harbor of the 5'" Amendment2 ate Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17 (1991). 2 See PeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4d. DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan. 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964Xthe Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fou

ned herein including, but not limited to, the discovery abuses and bad faith litigation tactics that Epstein has been the subject of at the hands of Scott Rothstein and his-co-conspirators, any tax returns must be redacted to preserve confidently and to prevent further abuses. See supra. Further, Epstein's com

us civil litigation abuses that resulted in profoundly serious injury to Jeffrey Epstein, including substantial attorneys' fees and costs. In short, Rothstein and his co-conspirators forged Federal court orders and opinions and, among other things, staged a series of depositions that were unrelated to any

e safe harbor of the 5 Amendment.2 See Ohio v. Reiner, 532 U.S. 17(1991). 2 See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company. 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fo

OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800)OOOCMJ3AG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff(s), vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and individually, Defendant(s). MOTION TO COMPEL OR ALTERNATIVELY TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM F

J3AG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff(s), vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually,

. Epstein asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fou

ounsel for Plaintiff, C.M.A. Brad Edwards, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Su

. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6 th Ed.). See also Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fou

Suite 2218 Miami, H., 33160 Brad Edwards, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Su

v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976)• McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6th Ed.). See also Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964Xthe Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Four

Judith Stevenson Arco, Esq., State Attorney's Office - West Palm Beach, 401 North Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401; William J. Berger, Esq., ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER, 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Ste. 1650, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394; Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER, 401 East Las

Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 41" DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fo

nsel, s/ Bradley J. Edwards Bradley J. Edwards ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Las Olas City Centre 401 East

Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. See DeLisi v. Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fo

l Question represented by Bradley James Edwards Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Blvd Suite 1

v. United States, 425 U.S. 391 (1976); McCormick on Evidence, Title 6, Chap. 13. The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, §138 (6th Ed.). See also Malloy v. Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fou

BE NOTICED represented by Bradley James Edwards Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Blvd Suite 1

Defendant asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-Incrimination. See DeLisi I Bankers Ins. Company, 436 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 41b DCA 1983)• Malloy I Hogan, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 1495 (1964)(the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fo

dibility of the messengers of the false information. And it was important = for me to also remind the public that Bradley Edwards was a 2 partner of [Scott] Rothstein, a man who is spending fifty a years in jail for fraudulently creating a Ponzi scheme to sell 4 Jeffrey Epstein cases that didn’t exist. Scott Roth

as Mich of his nicknames was TPOF Darkness,” and in private, he the repercussions of engagin Understand that I am capabl imagination could ever conju Rothstein hosted reception McCain, Bobby Jindal, Arno out hundreds of thousands contributions. He gave millio ; the Joe DiMaggio Children’ HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_0

e and let you knoy twenty-fourth, and it is gc brother....Really enjoyed : watch[ing] a little football a me. We love you. Take care. That same day, Rothstei Casablanca, Morocco. For a Tunning. But a few days late Fort Lauderdale. The Ponzi! The moment he did, he s for a lenient sentence. Roths the list i

Donald Trump. How would you characterize the two men? ° Several people have described you as a very loyal friend. Is that a fair characterization? n Malloy, and I began work on ° I’ve heard that Leslie Wexner removed all photographs d to interview Jeffrey Epstein ' of you from his home. Given how close y