Epstein Secrets

Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) and Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beac FL 33401-5012 Fax: Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein 4 EFTA00231323 RECYCLED PAPER TO REORDER CALA, 9M-846-9399 EFTA00231324 IN THE CIR

torney's Office — Southern District, 500 S. Australian Avenue, , West Palm Beach, FL 33401, JUDITH STEVENSON AREO, ESQ., State Attorney's Office — West Palm Beach, 401 North Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401, WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQ., and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, 401 East Las Olas

ately ad s these fa rs in their motion. In fact, Defendant completely ignores the likelihood Likely this is because there is no likelihood that the Fourth District would reverse ling since the proper procedures for sealing the NPA were never followed. As to likelihood of harm, the only reference Defendan to

e it wan. It wasn't at the 8 response. S Rothstein office. And I just don't -- it was somewhere 1 THE WITNESS: And wo keep talking about t in Went Palm Beach -- at a law firm in West Palm. 10 money. But a➢ attorneys always tell jurors, 10 Q So the joint prosecution agreement concept II this is the o

So I served on the 12 Fourth District and served with a panel of judges 13 and heard quite a number of cafes and wrote several 14 decisions for the Fourth District. Q The jury may not be familiar with the 14 procedure, but when the appellate court reviews 17 decision➢ that are rendered and jury trial re➢ul

Office — Southern District, 500 S. Australian Avenue, Suite 400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401, JUDITH STEVENSON AREO, ESQ., State Attorney's Office — West Palm Beach, 401 North Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, FL 33401, WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQ., and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, 401 East Las Olas

ld a stay not be 769 So.2d 389, 391 n.4 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Defendants fail to adequately ad completely ignores the likelihood likelihood that the Fourth District would reverse for sealing the NPA were never followed. As to likelihood of harm, the only reference Defendan paragraph 3 of his motion. Here, Defe

ileTaixt U.S. Mail to; R. Ainstneter Acosta; United StatesAtIhnt&s Oiglet ;•Soulhorn • !I li. :' • i District; SQ0 S.Austttillati Ave., Ste. 400, West Palen Beach, FL 3,1419 . 11.fiutat . • . .. • r : • • * nit • • 1 ' ;':y i i !I i Illeitaa WiteAtiliffe,IEsq,i, and Judith Stevenson Arco, Rs.q? Stat4!

equately ad•` s fa ;•rs in their motion. In fact, Defendant completely ignores the likelihood Likely this is because there is no likelihood that the Fourth District would reverse ling since the proper procedures for sealing the NPA were never followed. As to likelihood of harm, the only reference Defendan to