Epstein Secrets

nd, incredibly, accusing Edwards of using L.M., E.W. and Jane Doe for his own personal gain. As Epstei

rds adv. Epstein Case No.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Response in Opposition to Epstein's Motion to Reopen Discovery Page 3 of 8 throughout Epstein's Initial Complaint. Any suggestion that L.M.'s deposition is needed "solely" as a result of the Court's December 5, 2017 ruling is therefore absurd. 4. Jane Doe is a

mplaint in Razorback Funding, LLC, et aL v. Scott W. Rothstein, et aL, Case No. 09- 062943(19); see De

ne Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, 08-80893-CIV Marra/Johnson; copies of subpoenas; Deposition Transcript of Jeffrey Epstein, p. 23; line 4-p. 38; line 22; Initial Complaint filed by Epstein dated December 9, 2009, pages 13-20; Razorback Amended Complaint; pp. 16-17; ¶1148, 49. The litigation practices giving rise to pr

n 2 EFTA00583953 Funding, LLC, et aL v. Scott W. Rothstein, et at, Case No. 09-062943(19); see Dep

ane Doe v. Jefrey Epstein, 08-80893-C1V Marra/Johnson; copies of subpoenas; Deposition Transcript of Jeffrey Epstein, p. 23; line 4-p. 38; line 22; Initial Complaint filed by Epstein dated December 9, 2009, pages 13-20; Razorback Amended Complaint; pp. 16-17; ¶¶ 48, 49. In addition, on July 24, 2009, while he wa