Epstein Secrets

tein's illegal activities. Brad Edwards was never even formally interviewed by the authorities. Yet Epstein now claims that an e-mail string between Scott Rothstein and at least five other attorneys, including Brad Edwards, who were never implicated in and had no involvement whatsoever in Rothstein's Ponzi schem

5. In his Notice of Filing Appendix. Epstein, through counsel, includes privileged materials under a section titled "Edwards' Direct Involvement in Rothstein's Ponzi Scheme." If nothing but consistent, Epstein, through counsel, then sprinkles throughout the Motion for Court to Declare Relevance direct ac

ion titled "Edwards' Direct Involvement in Rothstein's Ponzi Scheme." If nothing but consistent, Epstein, through counsel, then sprinkles throughout the Motion for Court to Declare Relevance direct accusations and implicit insinuations that, regardless of whether 2 The idiom "jumping the shark" is a pejorative refer

TEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Case No. 50-2009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff. / COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITIO

ntal to his case and question his credibility, not because they will cause any undue prejudice because of their alleged late disclosure." Page 10 "A. Rothstein, Rosenfeldt and Adler E-mails Epstein identified and disclosed a number of emails from the Rothstein, Rosenfeldt and Alder firm that directly contr

ion titled 'Edwards' Direct Involvement in Rothstein's Ponzi Scheme.' If nothing but consistent, Epstein, through counsel, then sprinkles throughout the Motion for Court to Declare Relevance direct accusations and implicit insinuations that, regardless of whether Epstein had probable cause to institute or continue h

TEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Case No. 50-2009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff. / COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITIO

- "In his Notice of Filing Appendix, Epstein, through counsel, includes privileged materials under a section titled 'Edwards' Direct Involvement in Rothstein's Ponzi Scheme.' If nothing but consistent, Epstein, through counsel, then sprinkles throughout the Motion for Court to Declare Relevance direct ac

ion titled 'Edwards' Direct Involvement in Rothstein's Ponzi Scheme.' If nothing but consistent, Epstein, through counsel, then sprinkles throughout the Motion for Court to Declare Relevance direct accusations and implicit insinuations that, regardless of whether Epstein had probable cause to institute or continue h