Epstein Secrets

GOLDBERGER a WEISS. P.A. e 1400 Iv would be unacceptable, that specific individual 17 lo exhibits needed to be listed. I'n sure your Honor By JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE :5 has a recollection of these circumstances. And 18 29 21 that, obviously, is a fairly standard order that S0 31 your Honor adheres

fling 17 Mr. Link's law flat, the Fowler Mite law firm, I 17 that request on behalf of my clients. is is believe there are several others, Mr. Goldterger's law firm, we want then all co canvass their 1$ 19 We're told that Mr. Goldberger has seen it, we're told Mr. Epstein ha0 seen it. We want to

ding this. I Combine Investments versus Rothstein. 0 believe that prejudice outweighs any, any value it I Interestingly, a natter related to the Ponsi a might have, any relevance in this action, because , schma. 10 he needs co show damages proximately caused and not 10 And those two eases to

R 8 WEISS, P.A. 18 just take 10 seconds to present. 19 I'm here pro hac vice, which I'm not 18 20 sure the Court is concerned about. Wo do By JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE 19 21 have a notion to seal the pleading and 10 22 related mails. It's unopposed. We ask li 22 23 that it bo granted. Temporarily

8,9,13 24:15 25:5 38:12 42:5,12 45:13 47:2 48:4 55:18 56:22 58:21 62:18 62:24 63:1,16 64:4 65:21,22 66:2 72:15 76:14 77:15 78:23 80:12 89:1 GOLDBERGER 2:17,18 good 3:1 4:8,16 5:4 51:24 73:18 82:20 gosh 10:24 grant 39:10 48:3 54:18 78:7 granted 4:23 granting 88:3,7 gravity 3:10 great 7:25 3

ou 23 the difference. 23 can't fix today what was wrong in May, 24 If I put his language In, which tied it 24 that's the problem. 25 to the Ponsi scheme, be wouldn't have added 25 THE COURT: The pretrial stipulation, Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561-471-2995 EFTA00793892 2 3 4 5

4 1a disclosed would net be penn/Lted CO be used at. 25 For Jeffrey Epstein: 17 trial. You rude it clear that catchall listings 16 ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER a WEISS, P.A. 1ca would be unacceptable; that specific Individual 17 lo exhibits needed to be listed. I'n sure your Honor By JACK A. GOLDBERGER

ERBURY, GOLDBERGER a WEISS, P.A. 1ca would be unacceptable; that specific Individual 17 lo exhibits needed to be listed. I'n sure your Honor By JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE 25 has a recollection of these circumstances. And 10 29 21 that, obviously, is a fairly standard order that S0 31 your Honor adhere

ding this. I Combine Investments versus Rothstein. 0 believe that prejudice outweighs any, any value it I Interestingly, a natter related to the Ponsi a might have, any relevance in this action, because , schma. 10 he needs co show damages proximately caused and not 10 And those two eases to

, air. IS A No. 19 42 and are you familiar with the law firm that 20 was representing Mr. Epstein while you were involved? 21 A well, lack Goldberger and the Luttier firm, I 22 believe. 33 0 Bob Critton. 24 A Critton. 23 0 Dld you know Bob Critton? Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. 561

ve -- I 10 think I mot him during the Ep➢tein deposition. But II that might have bean the first time I mot him. 11 0 Now about Kr. Goldberger, Jack Goldberger? 13 A Probably the first time I mat him, too. 14 0 Did you do any research on Mr. Crltton or 39 Mr. Goldberger? 26 A No. I didn't do resea

hree child victims? A No. Q Dld there coma a tine when you learned that Rothstein had used the cases that we have been referring to to attract Ponsi schema investor➢? A I learned that sometime in the beginning of November of 2009 by -- , by reading it in the paper. Q prior to that tine, w