Epstein Secrets

00798365 2 3 4 f 7 4 a 10 11 12 13 13 17 IS 20 21 22 23 24 25 117 transfer of a➢aota by Mr. Epstein that waa filed with Judge Marra? A No. I never hoard of that. Q Did you review the order entered by Judge Marra where he found that there wa➢ no evidence to support the filing

fer of a➢aota by Mr. Epstein that waa filed with Judge Marra? A No. I never hoard of that. Q Did you revie

November of 23 2009. 24 Q Approximately 18 months -- about year and a 25 half? represented another law firm in a breakup of firma 2 And the Scherer firm waa owed over a million 4 5 4 7 • In Coos. And the client, the other law firm, was reneging on paying that. And Scherer won at the tria

even though the offices I worked II before you would file it, right? 12 out of wore in Miami. And I have heard of the Conrad 12 A Right. 13 Scherer firm throughout my practice. II Q Would you note every single fact that 14 4) You said one of the things in your direct 14 existed at the tim

And 24 we have an order of the court by — Judge Marra 25 entered an order that we need to meet and co

tman. And 24 we have an order of the court by — Judge Marra 25 entered an order that we need to meet and co

e bankruptcy estate. 11 The second thing would be there's already at 12 least one pending suit that I know is in this 13 division, filed by Mr. Scherer. There probably 14 will be others that will come before you. As long 15 as they don't name the debtor and they don't 16 involve the assets, whi

A FT. LAUDERDALE DIVISION Case No. 08-CIV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTE

hat the Epstein case was a real case and ultimately invested money. A copy of the transcript of this hearing is attached hereto as Exhibit "3". Mr. Scherer's remarks appear on pages 17-22.2 On August 13, 2010, Bankruptcy Judge Raymond Ray ordered in response to a subpoena from Epstein the appointment of

A FT. LAUDERDALE DIVISION Case No. 08-CIV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTE

hat the Epstein case was a real case and ultimately invested money. A copy of the transcript of this hearing is attached hereto as Exhibit "3". Mr. Scherer's remarks appear on pages 17-22.2 On August 13, 2010, Bankruptcy Judge Raymond Ray ordered in response to a subpoena from Epstein the appointment of

s in LM v. Jeffrey Epstein, 502008CA028051XXXXMB AB; EW v. Jeffrey Epstein, 502008CA028058XXXXMB AB; and Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein, 08-80893- CIV Marra/Johnson; deposition of Jeffrey Epstein, p. 23, line 4; p. 38, line 22. R. 809-10, citing amended complaint in Razorback Funding, LLC, et al. v. Scot

Funding, LLC, et al. v. Scott W Rothstein, et al., Case No. 09-062943 ("Razorback Complaint"), on behalf of some of the Pont scheme investors. Mr. Scherer asserted the following in the Razorback Complaint at pages 16-17 regarding the Epstein cases: In certain instances, the purported settlements, albe

A FT. LAUDERDALE DIVISION Case No. 08-CIV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTE

hat the Epstein case was a real case and ultimately invested money. A copy of the transcript of this hearing is attached hereto as Exhibit "3". Mr. Scherer's remarks appear on pages 17-22.2 On August 13, 2010, Bankruptcy Judge Raymond Ray ordered in response to a subpoena from Epstein the appointment of

ase No.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Edwards' Opposition to Epstein's Motion for Summary Judgment Page 12 of 15 reliance on public filings, including the Scherer Complaint against Rothstein is unavailing. As discussed above, the evidence warrants the finding that Epstein knew that Edwards was legitimately purs

lved and depended upon his plane travel. Although Judge Marra dismissed the RICO claim at some point in the fed

litigation. The RICO claim alleged that Epstein ran an expansive criminal entirpitge that involved and depended upon his plane travel. Although Judge Marra dismissed the RICO claim at some point in the federal litigation, the legal team representing ever clients intended to pursue an appeal of that dismi

at there was some improper coercion involved in, for example, Jane Doe’s case, his remedy was to raise the matter before Federal District Court Judge Kenneth A. Marra who was presiding over the matter. Far from raising any such claim, Epstein sinisly chose to settle that case. He is therefore now barred by the doct