Epstein Secrets

The Palm Beach Post's (the "Post") Motion to Intervene and Petition for Access to certain court records in this case. It is our understanding that Bradley Edwards and William Berger of Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler have filed a similar motion on behalf of a non-party known as =11 and that a motion is set for he

• •••••••• ••••••••••••••• • To: R. Alexander Acosta, Esq. Fax: Judith Stevenson Arco, Esq. Michael McAuliffe, Esq, Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Brad ley J. Edwards, Esq. William J. Berger, Esq. From: Deanna K. Shullman, Esq. Date: 06/01/2009 Re: State v. J. Epstein Pages: 6 Urgent U For review U I Pl

el for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 80811 Brad Edwards, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las O

hael McAuliffe, Esq. Jack Alan Coldberger, Esq. Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. William J. Berger, Esq. From: »minne K. Shullm

No. 3-89-293-H. Jan. 16, 1990. Defendant who allegedly breached nonprosecu- lion agreement moved to dismiss indictment or to suppress statements. The District Court, Sanders, Chief Judge, held that: (I) defendant, who refused to cooperate by failing to meet with Government representatives, failing to testify b

eries13 that specifically targeted news articles from the case that addressed the defaming statements (e.g., Jeffrey Epstein v. Scott Rothstein and Bradley 2 Edwards lawsuit) to retrieve a set of articles that directly related to the defaming statements". I employed a modified snowball technique1s, starting with

N 1. I have been retained by the law firm of Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, PA. to provide expert analysis and opinion on behalf of Mr. Bradley J. Edwards in the case originally styled Jeffrey Epstein, Plaintiff, vs. Scott Rothstein, individually, Mr. Bradley J. Edwards, individually, and'. M., indivi

ion, I have been asked to respond to the following question: 9. What is the level of dissemination of defaming statements associating Mr. Bradley J Edwards with the illegal activities of Mr. Scott Rothstein as a result of Mr. Jef•ey Epstein's lawsuit against Mr. Edwards? 3 EFTA00601579 10. For brev

TRICS, LLC fka SPUR DIGITAL ., dba SPUR INTERACTIVE and STEVE LATHAM VS ADOMETRY, INC. fka CLICK FORENSICS, INC. Cause 2012-44351 / Court: 281. (The District Court of Travis County, Texas.) Law Firms: Watts & Guerra LLP and DiNovo Price Ellwanger & Hardy LLP 77 EFTA00601653 Year Retained Deliverables R

ent for filing the Joinder Motion." (Id. at ¶ 11). alleges that Dershowitz made this statement about her counsel "wrongfully." (a) Cassell *567 and Edwards sued Dershowitz for defamation, and that case was settled in April 2016. (I at 'II 11-12). In 2015, Dershowitz made a number of statements in va

lleged sexual activity. (a at ¶ 10). Thereafter in 2015 Dershowitz said on national television that counsel on the joinder motion, Paul Cassell and Bradley Edwards, had engaged in "unethical behavior warranting "s ent for filing the Joinder Motion." (Id. at ¶ 11). alleges that Dershowitz made this statement ab

and others by claiming that she was forced to engage in sexual activity with him. Defendant moved to dismiss and to disqualify law firm Holdings: The District Court, Loretta A. Preska, Senior District Judge, held that: III single publication rule did not apply to bar claim on limitations grounds; (2) plaintif

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 MEMORANDUM OF LAW ON EDWARDS' WAIVER OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND

, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff. / COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW ON EDWARDS' WAIVER OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK PRODUCT PROTECTIONS Counter-Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), submits this Memorandum of Law as to the Do

nal report and notes of counsel to the SEC under a voluntary disclosure program. Id. at 1368-69. These documents were sought in subsequent lawsuits. The District Court of Columbia Circuit unsurprising found waiver: Tesoro willingly sacrificed its attorney-client confidentiality by voluntarily disclosing material

tes District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., Fanner, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehr

Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., Fanner, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah Attorneys for Jane Doe # I and Jane Doe # 2 Roy Bl

Rule 15) or must he obtain leave (Rule 21)? The district court cases are divided. The question has not been squarely decided at the circuit level. The District Court in this case gave precedence to Rule 21. We reach the opposite conclusion. Id. at 872-73 (footnotes omitted). The Fifth Circuit noted that Rule 15

tes District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehr

Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, 4.74 Ninrih A tin* c AN / Paul G. Cassell Quinney College of Law at the Attorneys for Jane Doe # 1 and Jane Doe # 2 Roy Bla

Rule 15) or must he obtain leave (Rule 21)? The district court cases are divided. The question has not been squarely decided at the circuit level. The District Court in this case gave precedence to Rule 21. We reach the opposite conclusion. Id. at 872-73 (footnotes omitted). The Fifth Circuit noted that Rule 15

tes District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehr

Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman, P.L. Paul G. Cassell 20 EFTA00210639 C! tin" 1- • Attorneys for Jane Doe # 1 and Jane Doe # 2 Roy Black Jackie Perczek E

Rule 15) or must he obtain leave (Rule 21)? The district court cases are divided. The question has not been squarely decided at the circuit level. The District Court in this case gave precedence to Rule 21. We reach the opposite conclusion. Id. at 872-73(footnotes omitted). The Fifth Circuit noted that Rule 15

ivilege and notoriety would make it difficult for "[other] victims to come for- ward." Id. at 72. Ms. Courtney Wild was introduced by her counsel, Brad Edwards, and said she was "sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein starting at the age of 14." Id. at 73-74. She asked the Court to "keep [Mr. Epstein] in det

While on work release "[h]e was having .. . female visitors ... and continu- ing to engage in .. . [sexual] conduct ... while he was in jaill." Mr. Edwards is counsel to one of Mr. Epstein's victims. See Reuven Fenton and Kate Sheehy, Jef- frey Epstein had sex den while serving time: lawyer, New York

18, 2019 Background: Defendant was charged with sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy. Defendant moved for pretrial release. Holdings: The District Court, Richard M. Berman, Senior District Judge, held that: (1) defendant posed danger to others and to community; So too here in the sense that Donzig

wealth and privilege and notoriety would make it difficult for "[other] victims to come for- ward." Id. at 72. Ms was introduced by her counsel, Brad Edwards, and said she was "sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein starting at the age of 14." Id. at 73-74. She asked the Court to "keep [Mr. Epstein] in det

While on work release "[h]e was having .. . female visitors ... and continu- ing to engage in .. . [sexual] conduct ... while he was in jaill." Mr. Edwards is counsel to one of Mr. Epstein's victims. See Reuven Fenton and Kate Sheehy, Jef- frey Epstein had sex den while serving time: lawyer, New York

18, 2019 Background: Defendant was charged with sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy. Defendant moved for pretrial release. Holdings: The District Court, Richard M. Berman, Senior District Judge, held that: (1) defendant posed danger to others and to community; So too here in the sense that Donzig

ddress) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Stuart S. Mermelstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED represented by Bradley James Edwards Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Blvd Suite 1650 Ft. Lauderdale , FL 33301 Fax: Email: LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Paul

Entered: 06/08/2009) 06/08/2009 14k RESPONSE in Opposition re 144 Defendant's MOTION to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket filed by Jane Doe. (Edwards, Bradley) (Entered: 06/08/2009) 06/08/2009 147 RESPONSE in Opposition re 104 Defendant's MOTION to Strike Cases from Current Trial Docket filed b

tection for their investigations while the victims were minors, but completely eliminate those protections the moment one of the victims turned 18. The District Court for the Northern District of Florida confirmed this position and specifically rejected the plaintiffs' contrary argument. See Doe I. Francis. No. 5: