Epstein Secrets

181534 Mark Epstein September 21, 2009 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 M. Epstein Jean Luc Brunel? A. No. Q. How often are you at the property at 301 East 66th Street? A. I pick up my children there sometimes. Maybe -- well, actually, they ar

years old, would you let them alone with him? MR. COHEN: Objection. MR. CRITTON: Form. A. Yes, I would. Q. Do you know anything about Jean Luc Brunel? A. I never heard the name before. You just mentioned it before. Q. Are you familiar with the modeling agency MC Squared? A. No. Q. Do you know

re 13, 14 years old, would you let them alone with him? MR. COHEN: Objection. MR. CRITTON: Form. A. Yes, I would. Q. Do you know anything about Jean Luc Brunel? A. I never heard the name before. You just mentioned it before. Q. Are you familiar with the modeling agency MC Squared? A. No. Q. Do

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 M. Epstein Jean Luc Brunel? A. No. Q. How often are you at the property at

, that's fine. MR. COHEN: All right. Thank you. MR. EDWARDS And Sid Garcia is not in and he is not supposed to be in; right? MR. CRITTON: This is Bob Critton. I assume -- I don't know whether he was going to come or not, but I assume that everyone will also abide and not give Mr. Garcia a copy of the v

o the fonn. 17 A Fifth. 17 A Fifth. 18 Q How many limes have you ridden on the 18 Q Whnt is Jeffrey Epstein's relationship 19 airplane with Jean Luc Brunel? 19 with Sandy Berger? 20 MR. YAREMA: Object to the form. 20 MR. YAREMA: Object to the tbnn. 21 A Fifth. 21 A Fifth. 22 Q Each time that

pstein's relationship 19 airplane with Jean Luc Brunel? 19 with Sandy Berger? 20 MR. YAREMA: Object

ey Epstein's relationship 19 airplane with Jean Luc Brunel? 19 with Sandy Berger? 20 MR. YAREMA: Object

oe. 21 MR. LIINO: Adam Langino on behalf of 22 plaintiff, ■ 23 MS. EZELL: Cathy Ezell on behalf of Jane 24 Doe 101 and 102. 25 MR. CRITTON: Bob Critton on behalf of Page 13 1 Q. When was that? 2 A. I began on September of 2004. 3 Q. And where were you employed? 4 A. I work -- well, I have se

rine W. Ezell Bradley J. Edwards Deposition of Bill Riley Joint-privilege 03943-03945 09/18/2009 Adam Horowitz Jacquie Johnson Deposition of Jean Luc Bruhnel Joint-privilege 02911-02912 09/15/2009 Bradley J. Edwards Jack P. Hill Igor Zinoview depo Joint-privilege 02939 07/14/2009 Bradley J. Ed

n Katherine Ezell RE:Deposition of Jean Luc Bruhnel Joint W/P Priv. 15501.15555 09/18/2009 Jacquie

. Estrada Doe v. Epstein Joint-privilege 02044 09/04/2009 Katherine W. Ezell Bradley J. Edwards Doe v. Epstein — Joint-privilege e er r m Bob Critton 02048 09/04/2009 Robert C. Josefsberg Bradley J. Edwards Doe v. Epstein — Joint-privilege Letter from Bob Critton 02054 05/12/2009 Spence

ne named ? 20 MS. EZELL: ■ 20 A. No. M. no. No. 21 THE WITNESS: 21 Q. Jean Luc Bruhel? 22 MS. EZELL: I o I'm not sure. 22 A. Jean Luc? Jean Luc was a guy. 23 MR. CRITTON: Thank you. 23 Q. I know that. Did you know him? 24 BY MS. EZELL: 24 A. Yes. I know him. 25 Q. Did she have a reg

lm Beach. And I got to know 2 Orseck, on behalf of Jane Does 101 and 102. 2 Jeffrey through Lesley Wexner. And I used to work in 3 MR. CRITTON: Bob Critton. on behalf of 3 about 20 different. 20.25 different homes in Palm Beach 4 Jeffrey Epstein. 4 as a maintenance guy. 5 THEREUPON, 5 Q. Okay.

319 A. Yes, ma'am. Q. And you couldn't find it? A. I give it to Detective Joe. Q. Recarey? A. Yes, ma'am. Q. You mentioned that you called Mr. Jean-Luc Bernell about a recommendation when you were looking for a job. A. Yes, ma'am. Q. And did you know him from his visits in the home? A. Yes, ma'am. Q. D

15 A. No, sir. 16 MR. WILLITS: I don't have any other 17 questions. 18 CROSS EXAMINATION 19 BY MR. CRITTON: 20 Q. Mr. Rodriguez, my name is Bob Critton and 21 I represent Mr. Epstein as you're aware, I have a 22 few questions for you. 23 What I would like to remind you at the 24 start of this is

1 A. Yes, ma'am. 2 Q. And you couldn't find it? 3 A. I ati to Detective 4 Q. 5 A. Yes, ma'am. 6 Q. You mentioned that you called Mr. 7 Jean-Luc Bernell about a recommendation when you 8 were looking for a job. 9 A. Yes, ma'am. 10 Q. And did you know him from his visits in 11 the home? 12 A.

5 A. No, sir. 16 MR. WILLITS: I don't have any other 17 questions. 18 CROSS EXAMINATION 19 BY MR. CRITTON: 20 Q. Mr. Rodriguez, my name is Bob Critton and 21 1 represent Mr. Epstein as you're aware, I have a 22 few questions for you. 23 What I would like to remind you at the 24 start of this i

n Katherine Ezell RE:Deposition of Jean Luc Bruhnel Joint W/P Priv. 15501.15555 09/18/2009 Jacquie

edes C. Estrada Doe v. Epstein Joint-privilege 02044 09/04/2009 Katherine W. Ezell Bradley J. Edwards E.W., Doe v. Epstein — Letter from Bob Critton Joint-privilege 02048 09/04/2009 Robert C. Josefsberg Bradley J. Edwards E.W., Doe v. Epstein — Letter from Bob Critton Joint-privilege 0

calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible evidence; protected by privacy rights 03672-03673 06/26/2009 Wayne Black Bradley Edwards Brunel information Work product; attorney/client privilege; irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible eviden

issible evidence; protected by privacy rights 02045-02046 09/04/2009 Attorneys at RRA Bradley J. Edwards E.W., Doe v. Epstein — Letter from Bob Critton Work product; attorney/client privilege; irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible evidence; protect

irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible evidence; protected by privacy rights 03672-03673 06/26/2009 Brunel information Work product; attorney/client privilege; irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible eviden

client privilege; irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible evidence; protected by privacy rights from Bob Critton 02049-02053 09/04/2009 Doe v. Epstein — Letter Work product; attorney/client privilege; irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to t

calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible evidence; protected by privacy rights 03672-03673 06/26/2009 Wayne Black Bradley Edwards Brunel information Work product; attorney/client privilege; irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible eviden

ble evidence; protected by privacy rights 02045.02046 09/04/2009 Attorneys at RRA Bradley J. Edwards E.W., L.M. Doe v. Epstein — Letter from Bob Critton Work product; attorney/client privilege; irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of the admissible evidence; protect