Epstein Secrets

eft, she said. She said told her that Fpctein ep er $200 that day. Other. girls .told similar stories. In most accounts; the EPAsn time's,Peis° Sarah now tat 27, escorted the s :o Ep- steillilit ioom whose most re- cen cnown address is in North Carolina, has not been charged in the case. Pa

friends on the Manhattan and London party circuit are cutting her because she's had so much adverse press over her relationship with Prince Andrew, Fergie's ex, with whom she recently attended a downtown S&M-themed party. Her relationship with "Randy Andy" is said to be platonic, but the socially promi

Man- hattan money man- ager touched the girl inappropriately while she gave him a massage on one occasion in 2004 or 2005.The girl's attor- ney, Jeffrey M. Herman of Miami, an- nounced the suit Wednesday at a news conference at Peruvian Park. It is the third lawsuit Herman has filed on behalf of young women

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

ectly to her. On September 15, 2008, I complied with her request and sent the original to her and a copy of the letter to Mr. Mermelstein's partner, Jeffrey Herman, with a note explaining why the letter was sent directly to his client. Rule 4-7.4 relates to "Direct Contact with Prospective Clients." The victim

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

ication letter to go directly to her. On September 15, 2008, I complied with her request and sent a copy of the letter to Mr. Mermelstein's partner, Jeffrey Herman, with a note explaining why the letter was sent directly to his client. Rule 4-7.4 relates to "Direct Contact with Prospective Clients." The victim

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

ectly to her. On September 15, 2008, I complied with her request and sent the original to her and a copy of the letter to Mr. Mermelstein's partner, Jeffrey Herman, with a note explaining why the letter was sent directly to his client. Rule 4-7.4 relates to "Direct Contact with Prospective Clients." The victim

, 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.

ectly to her. On September 15, 2008, I complied with her request and sent the original to her and a copy of the letter to Mr. Mermelstein's partner, Jeffrey Herman, with a note explaining why the letter was sent directly to his client. Rule 4-7.4 relates to "Direct Contact with Prospective Clients." The victim

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

ectly to her. On September 15, 2008, I complied with her request and sent the original to her and a copy of the letter to Mr. Mermelstein's partner, Jeffrey Herman, with a note explaining why the letter was sent directly to his client. Rule 4-7.4 relates to "Direct Contact with Prospective Clients." The victim

achments 3. November 4, 2008 letter from Gail E. Ferguson, Assistant Ethics Counsel for The Florida Bar 4.

ar 4. Letter to Special Master setting forth criteria for selecting attorney representative. 5. 5 C.F.R. § 3801.106 6. September 8, 2008 e-mail to Jeffrey Herman regarding represented victims 7. Order to Compel Production and Protective Order EFTA00220719

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

ectly to her. On September 15, 2008, I complied with her request and sent the original to her and a copy of the letter to Mr. Mermelstein's partner, Jeffrey Herman, with a note explaining why the letter was sent directly to his client. Rule 4-7.4 relates to "Direct Contact with Prospective Clients." The victim

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

ication letter to go directly to her. On September 15, 2008, I complied with her request and sent a copy of the letter to Mr. Mermelstein's partner, Jeffrey Herman, with a note explaining why the letter was sent directly to his client. Rule 4-7.4 relates to "Direct Contact with Prospective Clients." The victim