Epstein Secrets

l had provided. The U.S. Attorney's Office called attorney Edwards to provide notice to his clients regarding the h

WVVW.PATHTOJUSTICECOM Oro Tam Class Attie., Personal Injury Wrongful Death Commercial Liogation Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos Et Lehrman, P.L. January 29, 2015 Wilfredo A. Ferrer United States Attorney Southern District of Florida 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, FL 3

u personally so that they could bring their concerns to your attention. Very truly yours, FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. Bradley J. Edwards Paul G. Cassell S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah• BJE: mwk Enclosures This daytime business address is provided for identif

sed in the Crime Victims' Rights Act. DATED this 7th day of July, 2008. Respectfully Submitted, THE LAW OFFICE OF BRAD EDWARDS & ASSOCIATES, LLC Brad Edwards, Esquire Attorney for Petitioner Florida Bar #542075 2028 Harrison Street Suite 202 Hollywood, Florida 33020 Telephone: 954-414-8033 Facsimil

ding royalty, politicians, businessmen, and professional and personal acquaintances. Complaint, Jane Doe No. 102 v. Epstein, No. 9:09-CV-80656- KAM (S.D. Ha. May 1, 2009). 3. In 2006, at the request of the Palm Beach Police Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation opened an investigation into all

t the victims had been encouraged by the FBI or the Office to overstate their victimization for monetary compensation. • On July 3, 2008, attorney Edwards contacted me to discuss how the Epstein matter had been resolved and to raise concerns regarding that resolution. I shared the concerns that attorn

EFTA00799870 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 414 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/11/2017 Page 10 of 11 Respectfully Submitted, /5/ Sal, P. Eeitualua Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale. Florida 33301 Telephon Facsimile E

n for monetary compensation. • On July 3, 2008, attorney Edwards contacted me to discuss how the Epstein matter ha

pposing party's case while simultaneously brandishing it as a shield from disclosure of any Achilles heels." Stern v. O'Quinn, 253 F.R.D. 663, 677 (S.D. Ha. 2008). CONCLUSION The Court should direct the Government to produce to the victims all documents that it previously withheld based on work-produc

as Blvd., Suite 1650, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33394; Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER, 401 East Las Olas B

victims and the public," Berger said. "The public should be outraged it has gone as far as it has." A second attorney representing the women, Brad Edwards, has seen the sealed document A federal judge allowed him and his clients to view it, but not to discuss its con- tents. Edwards said the wom

he women, Brad Edwards, has seen the sealed document A federal judge allowed him and his clients to view it, but not to discuss its con- tents. Edwards said the women were "outraged" at what had been negotiated without their knowledge. A reporter asked Edwards if he thought Epstein re- ceived

oe No. 71. Epstein, Case No. 08-80993 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe No. 6'. Epstein, Case No. 08-80994 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe II Epstein, Case No. 09-80469 (S.D. Ha. 2009); Doe No. 101 Epstein, Case No. 09-80591 (S.D. Fla. 2009); Doe No. 102'. Epstein, Case No. 09-80656 (S.D. Fla. 2009); Doe No. 81. Epstein, C

This Improver Motion Practice And Have No Demonstrable Need For More Several depositions have occurred over the last 4 weeks wherein it appears Mr. Edwards already has the information he seeks responsive to these requests, which is likely the reason Mr. Edwards has not filed any affidavits supporting t

ached to the NPA is a list which delineates alleged victims. Once the NPA was made public, Judge Colbath, with the agreement of the Palm Beach Post, Brad Edwards, Esq. and Spencer Kuvin, Esq. agreed that the "list" would remain private. As such, Request for Production Numbers 7, 9 and 10 seeks information th

Doe v. Epstein 08-CV80119 Page No. 26 also Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1) and Fla. Stat. 768.72; Gallina v. Commerce And Industry, Ins., 2008 WL 3895918 (S.D. Ha. 2009)(unless liability for punitive damages is established at trial, the discovery sought is not relevant). In Gallina, the court held that in lig

x: Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. fi al osim Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. Hill, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. F Brad Edwards, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe Isi

Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. F Brad Edwards, Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler Counsel for Pl

lative to their past medical and psychiatric histories and conduct. See Exhibits "B-G." 21. Cherenfant v. Nationwide Credit, Inc. 2004 WL 5315889 (S.D. Ha. 2004) allows for the discovery sought in Sections II. a-g above and in Defendant's Motion to Identify. See also Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 26; Oppenheimer Fun

9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 422 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2017 Page 11 of 12 DATED: September 1, 2017 Respectfully Submitted, AI taut 9. Samna Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 524-28

D Docket 09/01/2017 Page 11 of 12 DATED: September 1, 2017 Respectfully Submitted, AI taut 9. Samna Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 524-2820 Facsimile (954) 524-2822 E-mai

opposing party's case while simultaneously brandishing it as a shield from disclosure of any Achilles heels." Stern v. O'Quinn, 253 F.R.D. 663, 677 (S.D. Ha. 2008). Or, as the Eleventh Circuit has articulated the principle, a litigant "can no more advance the work-product doctrine to sustain a unilatera

ES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee ROY BLACK ET AL., Intervenors-Appellants REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS NON-PARTY INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFEE, WEISSING EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. Paul G. Cassell Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Appellees Jane Doe No.1 and Jane Doe No. 2 EFT

the merits. DATED: July 16. 2013 Respectfully Submitted, Is/ Paul G. Cassell Paul G. Cassell and Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. Attorneys for Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 I0 EFTA00209505 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The foregoing document was serv

davit." Doc. #98 at 3-4 (emphasis added) (quoting El-Ad Residences at Mirarmar Condo. Ass'n, Inc.. Mt. Hawley Ins. Co., 716 F. Supp. 2d 1257, 1262 (S.D. Ha. 2010). Rather than heed that specific warning from the Government that he needed to provide "evidence that demonstrates the existence of the privi

r the MC2 agency he owns," Florida attorney Brad Edwards, who represents a number of Epstein's alleged vic

ex-trafficking ring. "Jeffrey rents several apartments there where he keeps his girls, alleged models for the MC2 agency he owns," Florida attorney Brad Edwards, who represents a number of Epstein's alleged victims, told "Page Six" in 2009. "But Mark acts like he doesn't even know his brother." 12 EFTA0009

the briefing remains sealed, the decision of District Judge Kenneth E. Marra denying the motion, Doe v. United States, 950 F. Supp. 2d 1262, 1266 (S.D. Ha. 2013), reveals that the government argued the victims did not have standing because the relief they sought—the vacation or rescission of the non-pr

Alan Goldberger, Esq. (561) 835-8691 Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. (954) 527-8663 William J. Berger, Esq. F

7351 Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. (561) 835-8691 Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. (954) 527-8663 William J. Berger, Esq. From:

. v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80232 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe No. 4._vinstein, Case No. 08-80380 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe No. 5 v, Epstein, Case No. 08- 80381 (S.D. Ha. 2008); C.M.A. v. Epstein Case No. 08-80811 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe v. Epstein, Case No. 08-80893 (S.D. Fla. 2008); Doe No, 7 v. Epstein, Case No. 08-

. Senator Kerry refers to the statutorily imposed damage amount as "penalties." Id. The cases of U.S. I. Siegel, supra (I I's Cir. 1998), and U.S. . Edwards supra (3d Cir. 1998), also support Defendant's position that application of the current version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 would be in clear violation of t

pstein, 2009 WL 383332 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); Doe No. 31. Epstein 2009 WL 383330 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); Doe No. 41. Epstein, 2009 WL 383286 (S.D. Ha. Feb. 12, 2009); and Doe No. 5I. Epstein, 2009 WI, 383383 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); see also U.S. Scheidt, Slip Copy, 2010 WL 144837, fn. 1 (E.D.