Epstein Secrets

y Edwards, et al. (Case NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG); and upon reading the Affirmation of Robert Y. Lewis dated September 15, 2010, the Affidavits of Bradley James Edwards and Michael Fisten both dated September 14, 2010, the Memorandum of Law dated September 16, 2010, and all the exhibits attached thereto, and it appe

APPLICATION FOR CPLR 3102(E) ORDER Index No. TO PRODUCE TAPE RECORDING x NOTICE OF MOTION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed Affidavit of Bradley James Edwards dated September 14, 2010, the Affidavit of Michael Fisten dated September 14, 2010, the Affirmation of Robert Y. Lewis dated September 15, 2010, the

tein (Case No. 502008CA028058XXXXMBAB)(Florida Circuit Court, 15h Judicial Circuit). 3. In December 2009, Epstein brought a vendetta lawsuit against Edwards and others alleging abuse of process in connection with those civil actions. Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley Edwards, et al. (Case No: 502009CA040800XXX

n and me, which at bottom concerns his sexual abuse of girls while they were minors, the very topic of the recorded conversation. Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley Edwards, et al. (Case NO. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG)(Florida Circuit Court, 15th Judicial Circuit). I. The Sexual Molestation Actions Against Epstein and His

IAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO: 502009CA040800X)MMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually. BRALacpY J. EDWARDS, individually, and M., individually, Defendants. 17:3; t —CA c->"5-7, cn. % t 0 Cn -2 ° ! C' (n • • rn ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO A

t 0 Cn -2 ° ! C' (n • • rn ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO APPOINT COMMISSIONER r - THIS CAUSE, having come on before the Court upon Defendant Bradley J. Edwards's Motion to Appoint Commissioner, and the Court having heard argument of counsel, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is, ORDERED an

that Epstein had apparently written about the case. 13. I have been extensively involved in the investigation attempting to support Jane Doe's and Brad Edwards's claims against Epstein. As part of my duties in investigating the cases, I have attempted to locate all recorded statements made by 3 EFTA0072847

ecorded call. 7. Rush had previously spoken to attorney Edwards (the attorney representing Jane Doe) and me conc

columnist in the Daily News, that in the fall of 2009 he began to follow criminal and civil legal proceedings in Florida relating to Mr. Epstein (Rush Aff., Apr. 6, 2010 [Carroll Decl., Apr. 7, 2010, Ex. G] II 1-2), and that in November of 2009 he was able to arrange a telephone interview of Mr. Epste

E. The Present Motion to Compel I0 ARGUMENT 11 I. EDWARDS MAY NOT RELY ON THE VACATED DISTRICT COURT ORDER FROM THE JANE DOE ACTION 12 II. EDWARDS FAILS TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCOVERY OF A NON-PARTY UNDER CPLR 3101(a) 14 A. The Epstein Interview Does Not Have Heightened Relevance to

a deposition in one of the now-settled suits by implying that "he did not recognize" reporter Rush. Moving Br. at 17; see also Moving Affidavit of Bradley James Edwards, sworn to Sept. 14, 2010 ("Edwards Aft"), ¶ 22. Besides being farfetched and factually unsupported, Edwards' apparent desire to attack Epstein's cr

pstein sex abuse litigation, as even a quick Google search reveals. See. e.g., Heiress Quizzed in Sex Suits. M. POST, Oct. 12, 2009 ("Florida lawyer Brad Edwards. who represents three of the 'Jane Does' who are suing Epstein, told Page Six that Phislaine] Maxwell would be questioned over her knowledge of how

lawyers and others close to the case — including attorney Edwards — who could provide tips and information to assi

s among various lawyers and others close to the case — including attorney Edwards — who could provide tips and information to assist his reporting. Rush Aff. ¶¶ 3, 6-7. In October 2009, Rush obtained a telephone interview with Epstein to talk about the status of the civil cases against him. See Rush Aff

Rush Aff. ¶¶ 3, 6-7. In October 2009, Rush obtained a telephone interview with Epstein to talk about the status of the civil cases against him. See Rush Aff. ¶ 4; Balin Aff. Ex. L (Supplementary Affidavit of George Rush, sworn to April 30, 2010 ("Rush Supp. Aff.")), ¶ 2. Epstein and Rush agreed at the o

ail: Paul G. Cassell, Esq. (Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission Pending) 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake Ci Utah 84112 Tel.: Fax: E-Mail Counsel for Bradley James Edwards EFTA00728061 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 3 I. EPSTEIN'S SEXUAL ABUSE OF MINOR GIRLS AND HIS

EPSTEIN ABOUT HIS SEXUAL MOLESTATION AND ITS DISCLOSURE OF THE CONTENTS OF RECORED CONVERSATION TO THIRD PARTIES 5 IV. EPSTEIN'S ACTION AGAINST EDWARDS AND EDWARDS' COUNTERCLAIM 7 V. FEDERAL COURT ORDER FOR PRODUCTION OF THE RECORDING ? VI. EPSTEIN'S INVOCATION OF THE FIFTH IN THE EDWARDS ACTIO

atutes 18 U.S.C. § 2255 4 CPLR 3102(e) passim N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 79-h(g) (McKinney 2010) 11, 14 iv EFTA00728065 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Bradley Edwards seeks an order pursuant to CPLR 3102(e) for production of a tape recording of a conversation between a Daily News reporter and billionaire Jeffrey E

for three persons not involved in any Daily News reporting effort: a filmmaker, a social activist, and an attorney who had been following the case. Rush Aff. ¶ 6. Shortly after that meeting, one of the participants went to an investigator for Edwards' clients -- Michael Fisten -- and said, "My god, you'v