Epstein Secrets

nvestigating the-ease Epstein. See Declaration of Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. at ¶¶ 1-2 (hereinafter "Edwards Declaration").

agreed-to-seek no mere less than $150,000 in damages against Epstein — an amount that Epstein argued later was limited to no more than $50,000). See Edwards Declaration, Exhibit "C" (copy of the non-prosecution agreement). The agreement was signed by Epstein and his legal counsel, as well as the U.S. At

ht the Importance of Vi.. Page 3 of 3 Lauderdale, Florida 33301 and may be reached at (800)400-1098 or (964) 624- 2820 Additional information about Brad Edwards or Farmer, Jaffe, Welssing, Edwards, Fistos 8 Lehrman. P.L. may be obtained from the fires webalte at swAv palhlotustIce com. FAQ4 I Contact Us I

iem-at—II—Ph AUSA Villafafia strongly encouraged Attorney Edwards and his client to attend and address the Court a

ue lacl hither •"(psardrrerSoUng corn •-•"" Source : BARD WrIrerlog Cit/Town Fon La, deroale • SlouilA - Muted SLISIC 111OUSPt : Loser Tags : Brae Edwards. Jeffrey Epstein. Cruno V•ctrus Rights, Ulmer one urasono shortcut : prlog oriel 2313086 0111C111111111: 1$$ UOI1 011110 ;1101.. 101041.US are SI.

ty Co.. Excalibur Reinsurance Corp., No. 3:1 I-CV-1209 (CSH) (D. Conn. Aug. 5, 2013), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110400, at *37, quoting United States', Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1050 (2d Cir. 1995). These principles are vitally important here where counsels' private communications with prosecutors "if publicl

as alleged, was almost unspeakable." App. p 569. Plaintiff's counsel piled on, offering their own opinions about Ms. Maxwell's guilt. For example, Bradley Edwards opined that Ms. Maxwell was "a main facilitator" of Epstein's crimes who "started the whole thing." App. p 569. And Sigrid McCawley praised the pro

about Ms. Maxwell's guilt. For example, Bradley Edwards opined that Ms. Maxwell was "a main facilitator"

f the persons whose intimate relations may thereby be 40 EFTA00075522 Case 20-2413, Document 40, 08/20/2020, 2913550, Page47 of 74 disclosed."); Amodeo 11,71 F.3d at 1050 (" [T]he privacy interests of innocent third parties . . . should weigh heavily in a court's balancing equation."). This Court h

Avenue, Suite 2, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301, By: Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., S.J. QUINNEY COLLEGE OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF UTAH

r district court to edit and redact judicial document to allow access to appropriate portions after weighing competing interests); United States v. Amodeo. 71 F.3d 1044 (2d Cir. 1995) ("Amodeo 11") (presumption of access afforded to particular document filed with court varies with document's relevance

Inc., 121 F.3d 818 (2d Cir. 1997) (sealing file pursuant to confidentiality agreement between parties was not abuse of discretion); United States v. Amodeo, 44 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 1995) ("Amodeo I") (finding it proper for district court to edit and redact judicial document to allow access to appropriate p

Schultz BOLES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Ste. 1200 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 [email protected] [email protected] Bradley J. Edwards Stan J. Pottinger EDWARDS POTTINGER LLC 425 North Andrews Ave., Ste. 2 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 brad @pathtojustice.com [email protected]

h dispositive motions such as motions for dismissal or summary judgment." Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41, 50 (2d Cir. 2019) (citing United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1049-50 (2d Cir. 1995) ("Amodeo II")); (b) any minimum presumption of public access is subject to many countervailing interests suppo