Epstein Secrets

2 of 23 Epstein or his legal counsel might misappropriate these documents while in their physical possession for the limited purpose of copying and Bates numbering them, this Court specifically ordered that "Fowler White will not retain any copies of the documents contained on the discs provided to i

ad represented a number of Epstein's victims in their civil suits against Epstein. Farmer Jaffe sought to have Epstein bear the costs of copying and Bates stamping these thousands of documents [DE 1120], ultimately resulting in an order from this Court that Epstein's counsel— attorneys at the law firm

orneys at the law firm of Fowler White Burnett, P.A. ("Fowler White")—would make a copy of the materials and return them to Fanner Jaffe. Because of Fanner Jaffe's obvious concern that 1 EFTA00799314 Case 09-34791-RBR Doc 6323 Filed 03/19/18 Page 2 of 23 Epstein or his legal counsel might misappropriate

originally, my understanding 3 is, two CDs that were delivered to Fowler White for 4 printing. Those documents were then put onto one CD, with 5 Bates numbers, and the documents were printed. So we now 6 have a single CD, that's correct. 7 THE COURT: And is the information contained 8 on this d

ended up with the order that we're talking 14 about today. IS Another point of clarification, Mr. Scarola 16 says that the order was entered over Fanner Jaffe's 17 objection. He may have had some — the law firm may have 18 had some concerns, but it's very clear it's an agreed 19 order. I don't know that th

tein, who had agreed to pay directly all such fees and costs. It was then determined that the number of documents that would need to be printed and Bates stamped exceeded 27,000, which would have resulted in significant costs to the Farmer Jaffe law firm. Consequently, Farmer Jaffe requested the Cour

TA00793669 confidentiality is breached or some residue or image of our documents remains at [Fowler White]." Special Master Carney took offense to Fanner Jaffe's insinuation that Jeffrey Epstein or any member of his legal team might look at the documents that were being printed at Fowler White or might retai

ask was assigned to Farmer Jaffe (where Mr. Edwards was a partner). In order to conduct the review, Farmer Jaffe wanted the 27,000 pages printed and Bates stamped so it could segregate out alleged privileged and unresponsive documents. Farmer Jaffe, however, did not want to incur the cost of reproduci

pursue production of them further solidifies Mr. Epstein's malpractice claims. While approximately 1,600 documents from the disc were identified on Fanner Jaffe's privilege log, because Fanner Jaffe (1) produced some of the documents on its log, (2) expressly agreed to produce gtl work-product documents to Fo