Epstein Secrets

to serve pro bono as a Special Master for the selection of the attorney-representative. The Special Master selected Robert Josefsberg and his firm, Podhurst Orseck, to serve as the attorney- representative. There is no business relationship between Mr. Josefsberg and either the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Speci

ent." The victim notification letters were not sent to prospective clients, nor were they for the purpose of obtaining professional employment. Ms. Ferguson next referred to Rule 4-4.2 "Communication with Person Represented by Counsel." As explained above, with one exception, letters to victims represen

t set of criteria were given to the Special Master, a copy of which is attached hereto. The Special Master selected Robert Josefsberg and his firm, Podhurst Orseck, to serve as the attorney- representative. There is no business relationship between Mr. Josefsberg and either the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Speci

orrespondence, including the attachments and the response of Assistant Ethics Counsel Gail E. Ferguson, dated November 4, 2008. In her letter, Ms. Ferguson reported that she could not provide an opinion letter because my inquiry was based, in part, on past conduct and that she could not provide legal ad

t set of criteria were given to the Special Master, a copy of which is attached hereto. The Special Master selected Robert Josefsberg and his firm, Podhurst Orseck, to serve as the attorney- representative. There is no business relationship between Mr. Josefsberg and either the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Speci

orrespondence, including the attachments and the response of Assistant Ethics Counsel Gail E. Ferguson, dated November 4, 2008. In her letter, Ms. Ferguson reported that she could not provide an opinion letter because my inquiry was based, in part, on past conduct and that she could not provide legal ad

t set of criteria were given to the Special Master, a copy of which is attached hereto. The Special Master selected Robert Josefsberg and his firm, Podhurst Orseck, to serve as the attorney- representative. There is no business relationship between Mr. Josefsberg and either the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Speci

, in part, on past conduct and that she could not provide legal advice regarding my obligations pursuant to statute or court order. Nonetheless, Ms. Ferguson did refer me to the relevant Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, specifically Rules 4-7.4(a), 4-4.2(a), and 4- 3.4(c). EFTA00216178 Rule 4-7.4 Mr.

t set of criteria were given to the Special Master, a copy of which is attached hereto. The Special Master selected Robert Josefsberg and his firm, Podhurst Orseck, to serve as the attorney- representative. There is no business relationship between Mr. Josefsberg and either the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Speci

orrespondence, including the attachments and the response of Assistant Ethics Counsel Gail E. Ferguson, dated November 4, 2008. In her letter, Ms. Ferguson reported that she could not provide an opinion letter because my inquiry was based, in part, on past conduct and that she could not provide legal ad

e best interests of the victims, a set of criteria were given to the Special Master. Fs The Special Master selected Robert Josefsberg and his firm, Podhurst Orseck, to serve as the attorney-representative. There is no business relationship between Mr. Josefsberg and either the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Specia

espondence, including the attachments and the response of Assistant Ethics Counsel Gail E. Ferguson, dated November 4, 2008. F'- In her letter, Ms. Ferguson reported that she could not provide an opinion letter because my inquiry was based, in part, on past conduct and that she could not provide legal ad

to serve pro bono as a Special Master for the selection of the attorney-representative. The Special Master selected Robert Josefsberg and his firm, Podhurst Orseck, to serve as the attorney- representative. There is no business relationship between Mr. Josefsberg and either the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Speci

correspondence, including the attachments and the response of Assistant Ethics Counsel Gail E. Ferguson, dated November 4, 2008. In her letter, Ms. Ferguson reported that she could not provide an opinion letter because my inquiry was based, in part, on past conduct and that she could not provide legal a

to serve pm bono as a Special Master for the selection of the attorney-representative. The Special Master selected Robert Josefsberg and his firm, Podhurst Orseck, to serve as the attorney-representative. There is no business relationship between Mr. Josefsberg and either the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Speci

orrespondence, including the attachments and the response of Assistant Ethics Counsel Gail E. Ferguson, dated November 4, 2008. In her letter, Ms. Ferguson reported that she could not provide an opinion letter because my inquiry was based, in part, on past conduct and that she could not provide legal ad

er. The letter also mentioned Jack Goldberger, who I knew to be Epstein's attorney, which scared me. I first got in touch with the attorneys at the Podhurst Orseck firm. My lawyers filed a lawsuit against Epstein for me, which mentioned that I was abused by Epstein and other powerful people. I was hoping that t

e 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 291-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/21/2015 Page 10 of 20 There was a lot of legal discussion about Andy and his ex-wife ("Fergie"). Then the discussion turned to me. Maxwell said "guess how old she is." Prince Andrew guessed 17. 35. Then we all went to a Chinese restaurant f

. Richard Willits, here on behalf of the plaintiff C.M.A.. THE COURT: Good morning. MS. EZELL: Good morning, Your Honor. I'm Katherine Ezell from Podhurst Orseck, here with Amy Adderly and Susan Bennett, and I believe my partner, Bob Josefsberg, is going to appear by telephone. THE COURT: Mr. Josefsberg, ar

encompasses any deviation from the Board's recommendation, including the People's discretion to recommend a lower risk level. See, e.g., People v. Ferguson, 53 A.D.3d 571, 572 (2d Dep't 2008) (holding that 10- day notice requirement applies not only to changes in RAI scoring, but to changes in factual p