Epstein Secrets

. the 1 more. ‘than 500 entries on the docket sheét for’ ‘Jane we + : 7 : “4 Doe’ s (consolidated) case will confirm (see-Case no. 9:08- 30119 (S.D: Fla. ): (case number. for consolidated eee Rongee : . cases on discovery), Jane Doe.and other. plaintiffs have made exhaustive attempts to, obtain inform

ttorneys and myself hs uncovered. other persons "that. were acquaintances of Mr. Epstein, specifically: Donald Trump, Alan Dershowitz, Bill Clinton, Tommy Mottola, and David Copperfield; we have. no information that any of those people (other than. . Mr- Dershowitz) have spoken to Mr. Epstein about Jane Doe or.

ROCEEDINGS Deposition taken before Cynthia Hopkins, Registered Professional Reporter and Florida Professional Reporter, and Notary Public in and for the State of Florida at Large, in the above cause. and JACK. ALAN GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Pal

news although not exactly local news, the case is now in the hands of Judge Antoon of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Floridain the case of Lollipops vs. The City of Daytona Beach. Last month, oral argument was held in Orlando on this matter with Daniel Aaronson representi

putting it on cable. The 'coke that was snorted was actually 812 powder. What yaw the funniest thing that hap- pened? We were filming Hailey and Tommy doing a reverse cowgirl or a table in the prison laundry. Hailey was going at it and then the legs of the table kicked out and Tommy landed on his

r the question: “Have +i ever socialized with Mr. Mottola in the presence of females under the age of 18?”

wards in support of his Motion for Summary Judgment, Edwards had a sound legal basis for believing that Donald Trump, Allen Dershowitz, Bill Clinton, Tommy Mattola, David Copperfield and Governor Bill Richardson had relevant and discoverable information (Exhibit “A” — Edwards’ Statement of Undisputed Fac

the litigation of his abuse of process claim against Edwards. For support, he relies primarily on the decision of Wolfe v. Foreman, 2013 WL 3724763 (Fla. 3d DCA July 17, 2013), wherein the Third District found that the litigation privilege barred both an abuse of process claim and a malicious prosecut

the question: “Have you ever socialized with Mr. Mottola in the presence of females under the age of 18?”

response to probative evidence offered against them.” Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 318 (1976); accord Vasquez v. State, 777 So.2d 1200, 1203 (Fla. App. 2001). The reason for this rule “is both logical and utilitarian. A party may not trample upon the rights of others and then escape the conseque

0 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010595 --- PAGE BREAK --- 73. Epstein's complaint alleges that Edwards provided notice that he wished to take the deposition of Tommy Mattola. That assertion is untrue. Mr. Mattola's deposition was set by the law firm of Searcy Denny Scarola Barnhart and Shipley. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhi

former President Clinton had relevant and discoverable information. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. • With regard to former Sony Record executive Tommy Mottola, Edwards was not the attorney that noticed Mr. Mottola's deposition. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. • With regard to illusionist David Copperfiel

mation. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. • With regard to former Sony Record executive Tommy Mottola, Edwards was not the attorney that noticed Mr. Mottola's deposition. See Statement of Undisputed Facts. • With regard to illusionist David Copperfield, Edwards had sound legal basis for believing Mr. Copp

pe the consequences by invoking a constitutional privilege - at least not in a civil setting." Fraser v. Security and Inv. Corp., 615 So.2d 841, 842 (Fla. 4* Dist. Ct. App. 1993). And, in the proper circumstances, «Silence is often evidence of the most persuasive character.'" Fraser v. Security and Inv.