Page 49 office 4:8,10 26:20 27:4 43:5,12,25 44:5 Official 2:22 44:22 officials 7:2 often 40:2 okay 3:25 5:19,21 18:10 30:2 Olas 1:17 old 31:18,18 once 22:5 one 4:23 7:17 11:25 17:24 18:5,16,20 18:21 20:1,8 22:24 31:11 36:24 39:10 40:16 42:23 44:11 only 13:22 14:3 17:24 23:20 25:4 29:20 36:6 39:1,3 42:23 open 26:24 43:19 opportunity 8:14,17 9:21 opposed 33:21 opposite 20:22 21:18 21:22 28:20 opposition 27:24 option 7:23 order 6:16 12:14 22:21 30:23,24 33:17,17 36:19 44:15 ordinarily 26:3 34:12 ordinary 27:10 39:13 originally 6:5 Orseck 2:2,5 3:17 other 7:1,17 16:4,5 17:22 22:13,18 23:6,21,22 24:1 25:21 26:8 32:8 34:9,11 36:12 42:18 43:8 44:10 otherwise 39:14 out 8:8 10:16 22:24 26:16,23 28:22 30:11 36:12 38:17 39:20 44:15 outside 13:18,19 24:17 16:7 over 11:19 24:24 own 12:21 38:13 Pacer 30:19 pages 7:14 27:23 28:9 paint 29:17 Palm 1:2,4,21 2:10 2:13 paper 10:16 13:7 papers 8:10,16 9:25 10:811:2) 12:20 15:6,1041:5 paragraphs 36:15 paraphrasing 6:20 Park 2:18 part 10:18 18:9 20:23 21:7 23:9,20 34:16 39:23 40:2,5 44:1 particular 6:15,18 7:24 8:22 9:18 11:17 13:5 parties 9:23 11:6 16:21 22:21 39:20 partner 3:18 4:3 parts 19:25 21:17 party 11:11 14:25 30:12,17 36:18 past 9:11 10:5 12:3,4 pay 17:3 21:8,10 25:5 pending 6:15 9:5 17:15 21:6 people 23:6 per 24:14,14,14,14 perception 28:21 perfect 36:1 39:5 perhaps 20:24 27:22 period 9:21 34:4 37:3,14 permitted 24:6,18 permitting 42:18 person 36:11 personal 10:23 23:21 perspective 16:23 35:10 pertains 29:20 phone 4:12,14,15 42:18,19 picking 12:13 place 31:12 37:14 43:20 plaintiff 3:7,14 24:15 30:4 34:20 43:7 plaintiffs 1:5,13 3:4 3:24 11:8 17:8,14 17:22 19:3 22:14 23:7,24 27:5 29:1 29:12,14,20 30:9 39:16 43:8 plaintiffs 19:4 26:8 36:16 playing 7:8 Plaza 2:18 plead 17:11 18:10,11 pleading 7:14 31:10 33:4 40:9,14 pleadings 23:4 31:3 32:13 please41:22 pled 17:8,1620:14 41:8 Podhurst 22,5 3:17 point 6:18 14:12 26:16,23 28:14 29:15 36:12 4323 pointed 14:20 portion 32:24 36:14 portions 5:15 posed 11:25 posing 8:4 position 5:5,8 6:4 7:7 7:25 9:16,20 ID:12 10:13 11:21,22 12:12,17,23 14:8,8 14:15 15:16 16:16 16:17 17:4,7 18:11 18:17 19:19 20:13 22:1,11 25:8 30:14 31:12 32:10,15,20 34:8 35:3,21 36:23 37:9 40:10 41:17 43:5 positions 30:20 41:5 possible 30:17 31:4 44:15 osslbly 34:9 *sting 25:22 otentlal 5:3 15:2 2R:2 otentially 10:18 15:19 ower 13:2 medal 1025 15:9 ractice 34:11 38:3 redicate 20:8,15 repared 20:5 27:15 resent 5:5 11:15 resents 9:7 ress 43:10 ressure 21:15 resume 23:24 retry 8:1 nor 6:6 8:25 12:14 36:19 stymy 19:22 12:7 robably 35:18 36:3 36:13 roblem 14:12 22:22 23:2,3 28:18 rocedure 32:16 34:24 roceed 12:10 18:23 32:22 38:13 roceedlug 6:15,15 roceedings 4:23,25 44:19 rocess 39:25 reduction 14:24 1920 rohlblted 38:3,4,18 rohibits 37:22 roof 20:16 roper 25:1 27:14 27:15 roseeuted 20:13 26:4 27:11 29:10 31:15 prosecuting 37:25 prosecution 26:6 28:23 29:6,7 34:25 prospect 16:15 protect 32:7 protecting 32:7 provide 31:8 36:13 36:21 provided 16:9 32:12 provides 9:22 providing 31:8 provision 6:12 8:11 29:19,25 34:10,25 37:11 38:3 39:17 39:18 provisions 13:6,7 psychologically 21:24 publish 23:5 pure 24:8 purpose 21:19,23 28:20 pursuant 25:15 32:8 41:17 pursue 23:12 pursuing 22:12,15 put 9:15 18:21 32:10 41:6 puts 18:25 34:4 40:10 41:11 0 question 8:3,7 9:2 12:1 30:25 questions 42:1 quite 19:10 R R44:17 raise 16:2 36:11 raised 15:25 16:13 18:5,21 19:13 28:10 33:14 35:9 40:1 read 37:20 42:2,23 reading 18:18 23:19 ready 29:7 real 9:6 10:8 36:11 41:18 really 12:2 18:11 30:20,23 33:14 36:17 Realtime 2:22 reason 6:14 7:3 29:23 31:11 34:2 reasons 18:5,20 34:19 40:8 recapitulating 41:1 received 5:5 15:3,4 20:4 recent 7.7 15:24 records 34:21 redacted 36:14 reference 27:25 referred 31:6 refers 41:16 refusal 9:10 refuses 8:7 refusing 25:5 regard 9:11,12,13 10:12,13,14,14 11:4 12:19 14:9 16:18 18:23 35:12 36:23 regarding 6:24 23:15 37:9 regardless 31:17,18 registering 41:9 relate 9:3 30:1 related 30:24 33:24 relates 8:12 relating 29:19 release 41:9 relevant 19:22 remain 42:13 remedy 7:20 8:17 29:21 33:20 34:7 41:2 remember 23:19 remind 44:3 remote 10:8 rep 35:14 replies 10:15 reply 35:22 REPORTED 2:21 Reporter 2:22,22 44:22 represent 21:3 32:12 35:15 representation 26:18 representatives 4:7 43:9 represented 21:7 26:24 33:5 representing 38:11 represents 18:16 35:16 requests 14:23 required 17:3 requirement 33:8 resist 34:18,23 resolve 42:8 resolved 7:4 19:12 24:16 respect 22:14 respectfully 7:6 14:4 respond 20:5 30:13 44:9 response 5:6 7:14 8:2 11:20 15:16,23 18:22 33:15 34:1,1 35:17,21 responses 10:14 30:21 35:8 restitution 29:2 31:16,23 EFTA00233729

Page 50 restitution/damages 32:19 restrictions 43:18 result 10:21 15:19 18:20 resulted 32:17 review 31:3 36:22 Richard 1:23 3:13 26:10 ride 40:17 right 3:24 6:24 12:25 13:3 25:8,14 34:23 37:2041:3 42:20 43:14 44:8 rights 13:5 25:16 32:7 risk 9:6 10:6,7 18:25 38:6 40:1041:6,11 risks 21:5 Robert 2:1,8 4:2 6:3 role 25:1317:7 Room 2:23 Rosenfeldt 1:17 rose-colored 11:16 Rothstein 1:17 HPR-CM-RNIR-F... 44:21 RPR-RMR-FCRR... 2:21 rule 39:9 42:13 rules 22:3 25:1 34:24 40:15 42:13 ruling 8:25 42:7 rulings 19:21 23:8 25:2 27:13,15 30:6 run 22:18 running 21:13 23:14 27:16 S same 6:10,168:3 20:13 27:12 31:12 32:10 35:21 38:21 satisfied 20:9 saying 7:10 8:1 17:17 19:12,16 20:6,7,8 21:14 25:5 33:9 37:10 39:5 says 8:15 13:7 17:11 18:13 35:1 38:5 40:14 41:3 scheduled 4:2i seal 5:18,23 sealed 42:14 second 20:23 27:2,5 30:24 36:25 37:4 Secondly 41:20 secret 17:1 Section 33:7 see 4:7 15:11 20:12 seek 23:25 seeking 6:7 24:3 seeks 34:22 •"”Irteer> seen 5:14,15 selected 35:15 self-fulfilling 24:23 self-Incrimination 6:25 send 10:16 38:17 39:6 sends 22:23 sent 14:22,23,24 16:6 17:10 39:15 39:19 separate 5:20 17:17 serve 11:5,6 set 12:21 13:13 18:4 31:22 36:9 settle 21:8 settling 21:10 25:5 severely 21:21 sex 41:9 sexual 23:6 shape 11:4 shield 29:1 show 36:22 42:11 Sid 3:10 side 7:17,17 sideline 8:9 silent 29:23 sim0ar 35:18 43:2 simply 11:17 since 20:20 sir 19:9 35:8 37:5 41:15 sit 8:9 sitting 42:3 situation 12:6 20:25 25:12 26:24 sole 29:21 solely 12:15 32:10 some 4:7 5:4 7:2,10 7:11,12 9:1,8,9 10:16 15:12 16:1,8 17:22 20:25 21:3 30:18 35:8 38:7 43:13 someone 10:17 19:22 24:20 26:3 34:12 34:17 37:16 39:15 something 13:19,24 l4:17 15:24 20:19 26:17 28:13 349 37:21,23 38:4,9 39:9 43:2 Sometimes 13:4 somewhat 6:5 soon 44:15 sorry 15:14 27:19 sort 32:10 33:17 34:19 sought 31:11 sound 37:16 South 2:12 SOUTHERN 1:1 speak 12:16 19:8 speaking 26:14 32:2 'MAY Maio Ia... Ilia•TmoV Specia121:2 32:16 specific 8:2 11:1 16:24 17:13 30:25 43:25 44:4 specifically 43:7 spector 11:18 speculative 109 spirit 25:20 spoken 30:3 standard 11:1 standpoint 10:25 15:9 start 23:15 state 3:3 9:6 28:4 29:4 40:12,17 41:8 stated 3:25 statement 33:23 statements 43:9 States 1:1,11 2:22 4:8 5:1,5,17 6:1 9:24 10:6 13:21 14:8,17 16:7 19:14 22:10,19 29:9 39:4 44:5,22 State's 27:16 statute 17:4 18:3 20:6 24:14 28:7 29:21 36:4,7,11 41:20 statutory 6:12 24:25 25:3 34:18 37:2 stay 4:23 6:8,19,21 7:3 11:24 12:16,19 12:23 15:25 19:16 21:22 22:2,4,4,5,7 24:22 25:21 30:24 33:14,15,16,21 34:2,2 37:21,22 42:5 43:4 44:1 stayed 25:19 staying 21:18 steps 27:10 still 5:7 Street 2:2,6,9 strictly 11:15 strikes 36:12 stuck 18:14 36:10 stuff 34:19 subject 5:3 26:5,21 27:13 30:6 submit 7:6 14:4 submitted 42:15 subpoena 119 34:17 34:20 subpoenaes 11:5 subpoenas 14:25 22:21 38:18 39:19 subsequently 6:9 9:16 substantial 9:6 1122,23 13:2 1825 41:11 sue 7:17 suffered 32:3 suggest 8:10,23 suggested 12:13,21 14:16 15:5,6 36:3 39:2 40:8,9 suggesting 16:7 suggestion 15:17 41:25 44:10 suing 25:10 suit 20:21 21:4 32:22 suits 26:25 summary 40:3 supporting 15:16 supposed 20:18 22:25 23:17 249 29:1 sure 5:7 14:11 26:2 29:16 33:22 37:25 Susan 3:17 system 31:23 &Larry 44:20 — T — — - T44:17,17 take 7:12 9:12 10:3,3 10:12,13,21 11:12 11:18,21,22 14:7 14:21 16:16,16 18:2 19:20 22:10 27:9,10 29:3 33:1 34:15,20 35:20 38:7,17 41:14,22 taken 7:7 9:11,21 14:9 15:5 30:20 41:10 43:5 takes 18:17 taking 9:8 14:23 19:17 22:12,20 23:15 25:20 34:8 41:5 talk 6:18 25:23 team 4:14 12:3 telephone 2:4,19,20 3:19 tell 11:13,14 42:12 telling 21:13 22:9 temporary 11:1 terminates 34:4 terms 9:3 22:7 33:20 thank 19:1,2 27:8,21 30:8,15 35:5,6 42:17 44:7,13 their 3:3,25 7:14,14 8:10,16 9:25 11:8 11:20 12:21 13:7 14:21 15:6,10 21:21 23:6 27:5 29:21 32:5,7,7 themselves 32:4 thing 25:4 27:12 28:21 31:11 39:11 things 11:3 38:15 39:22 43:10 think 6:8,14 8:15 9:4 9:22 10:19 11:22 12:24,25 13:6,6 17:16 18:18,23 19:14 25:13 27:6,6 27:22 28:18 29:15 30:23 39:6,8 42:1 42:2,6 43:15 44:14 third 11:6,11 14:25 22:21 39:20 thIrd-party 19:11 21:16 25:14 thoughts 27:2,5 threatening 44:1 three 41:14 through 3:5 6:9 11:7 11:16 29:14,22 31:5,24 32:6,16 till 14:2 time 6:10,11,12,15 6:19,20 13:3 17:5 21:12 31:18,19 34:4 36:3 37:2 38:21 dines 17:191&2 today 8:4 13:11 14:3 14:6,6 15:5 28:17 31:9,19 35:23 36:21 43:14 44:11 44:14 today's 13:12,14 told 2320 35:23 tools 10:25 tort 10:24 23:22 24:4,6 totally 20:5,21 23:1 41:24 TRANSCRIPT 1:10 transcription 44:19 trauma 32:3 traumatized 21:21 tried 31:3 32:6 troubled 43:24 true 17:12 try 23:11 30:16 32:18 34:17 44:15 trying 10:11 22:3 28:25 32:9 37:8 39:20 turn 12:8 two 4:13 9:23 1925 21:11 36:24 type 12:15 22:13 35:17 39:18 types 22:16 36:24 typical 11:2,4 22:15 23:3,4,8 ultimately 39:9 unable 29:19 uncertainty 9:14 uncomfortable 23:11 under 5:17,17,23 7:20 8:18 9:25 EFTA00233730

• Page 51 10:1,11,22 12:6,10 12:20 13:7,8 16:8 16:17,23 17:2,4,8 17:12,18 18:4,8,19 20:9,18,19,21 21:9 22:7 24:8,11,18,20 24:20 25:1,6 28:6 30:12 31:21 32:21 32:23 33:7,10 34:18,23 35:24 36:5,8,9 37:1,13 38:25 39:6,14 40:6 40:21,23 41:1 understand 5:7 14:15 21:25 22:3 23:24 29:25 30:14 31:7 37:8 38:20 3925 understanding 20:10 unfair 42:2 unilateral 12:22 unilaterally 7:13 1224 United 1:1,11 2:22 4:8 5:1,5,17 6:1 9:24 10:6 13:21 14:8,17 16:7 19:14 22:10,19 29:8 39:4 44:5,22 unless 11:7 34:25 unlimited 40:21 until 37:23 urge 22:9 use 10:25 11:8 20:24 23:11 28:25 40:11 used 28:19 U.S 2:15 4:10 7:1,9 8:6 12:8,12 16:16 26:19 27:4,18,19 43:5,11,25 U.S.A 2:16 U.S.0 33:7 various 3:1 1025 very 4:21 5:7 11:1,2 11:20 12:21 16:19 16:24 17:12,12 23:11 29:4 32:1 35:18 38:10 40:18 42:2 43:18 44:14 Via 2:4,19,20 victim 37:13 victims 20:12 21:20 28:23 31:12,16,23 32:13 33:18 35:16 39:20 41:17,18,19 41:19 view 36:19 14 4:9 4:10 17:10 30:10 30:15 33:24 34:14 35:2,4,6,12 39:4 44:9,12 violate 19:18 34:6 violated 5:2 14:2 39:6 violates 8:5,11 33:2 42:25 violating 9:16,19 38:17 41:6 43:13 oblation 8:23 9:9 10:4,19 11:20 12:7 12:9 13:15,19,20 13:23 14:10,19 15:2 16:7 18:19 24:19 25:19,20 29:10 34:10,13,24 35:12,24 37:17 40:25 41:4 violations 17:17,18 17:24 18:1,16 19:23 40:16 43:17 43:22 voluminous 31:4 vs 1:6 3:1 5:17 W 2:5 wait 8:10 18:13 42:12 waive 25:14 waiving 18:7 want 8:9,10 11:15 12:2 16:22 17:20 21:4,4,5,14 22:1,6 25:17 26:2,8,16,18 26:23 27:4 29:16 35:7 37:21 41:17 41:21 42:14,21 44:9 wanted 11:11 14:21 17:5 20:12 29:15 42:24 443 wants 11:14 13:3 19:2,16,20 23:4 24:24 33:16 34:2 warranted 6:22 wasn't 28:21 way 8:23 9:9 10:5,16 10:19 11:4 13:16 14:10 19:23 25:1 25:18 27:3,4 28:22 28:23 ways 30:18 wealthy 32:13 weigh 26:11 Weinberg 2:17 4:16 4:16 Weiss 2:12 wel17:10 8:20 10:22 11:12,12,13,13 12:17 13:16 14:11 15:7 16:18 17:15 17:23 18:10,11 33:24 35:12,19,20 36:5 39:4 40:13 went 6:18,22 26:23 32:1643:19 were 6:10 14:6 15:10 18:7 19:11 21:2 29:23 31:17,18 32:1,4,22 34:17 36:24 43:1 44:10 weren't 32:9 West 1:2,4,21 22,6 2:10,13 we'll 7:19,22 8:16 17:23 26:13 40:17 we're 9:810:2 12:10 13:14 19:10,12 20:5 27:15 28:17 39:143:14 44:2 we've 15:4 35:23 363 43:12 whatsoever 27:7 while 32:7 34:16 35:14 whole 20:12 38:11 wide 26:24 43:19 willful 8:23 12:7 willfully 9:19 Willits 1:23 3:13,14 26:10,10,14,15 27:12,19 win 29:5 withdraw 28:8,11 wonderful 28:23,24 word 24:21 worried 39:22 worry 41:1 I Worth 1:24 writing 28:13 written 5.6 2P9 23:4 X x 1:9 yeah 41:3 yesterday 21:9 young 20:23 21:3,20 515 17:20 5150,000 32:21 550,000 17:5 32:21 37:2 0 12116 2:18 08 12:18,18 08-80119-C1Y-M 1:3 1 5:17 10 36:15 10th I:23 101 2:3,7 33:5 35:13 35:17 38:23 39:3,7 40:8 102 6:8 35:19 36:1,3 40:9 41:21 103 21:5 35:19 104 35:19 105 35:20 11:1044:16 12 1:5 9:4 12th 13:12 13 7:14 9:4 14 7:14 150 17:19,20 18:2 24:12 17 27:23 28:9 18 33:7 18205 1:14 19 27:23 28:9 2 2 3:5 5:17 6:9,16 29:14,22 20 2:18 17:25 18:2 2009 1:5 13:12 22 7:21 10:2 2241:21 2255 16:23 17:4,17 17:18 18:8,12,14 20:2,9,19,21 23:21 23:22,23 24:8,17 24:21 25:6 31:21 32:21,23 33:7,10 36:6,23 37:13 41:2 2290 1:23 25 2:2,6 250 2:12 26 20:4 3 3 1:18 30 17:16,19,19 30-count 40:12 305358.2800 2:3,7 305.523.5290 2:23 305.931.2200 1:15 3051523-5290 44:23 305/523-5639 44:23 33 6:17 9:1 33128 2:23 44:23 33130 2:3,6 33160 1:15 33301 1:18 33394 2:16 33401 1:21 2:10,13 33461 1:24 34 21:20 4 4 1:18 11:12 400 2:23 4422 401 1:17 5 5 1:18 6:9 5th 12:18 50 18:2 24:12 500 2:15 515 2:9 561.582.7600 1:24 561.659.8300 2:13 561.832.8033 1:22 561.842.2820 2:10 6 61:18 617.227.3700 2:19 7 7 1:18 3:5 29:14,22 36:15 8 8 36:15 8N09 2:23 9 936:15 954.356.7255 2:16 954.52234561:19 EFTA00233731

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT CASE NO: 4D09-2554 L.T. No. 2008 CF 9381 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Petitioner, STATE OF FLORIDA, E.W., THE PALM BEACH POST, B.B, Respondents. E.W.'S SEALED REQUEST TO DISMISS THE PETITION FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION Respondent, E.W., would show the Court as follows: 1. This Court lacks jurisdiction to hear this petition. The order under review is a non-final order for which no appeal is provided by Rule 9.130. A non-final order for which no appeal is provided by Rule 9.130 is reviewable by petition for certiorari only in limited circumstances. The order must depart from the essential requirements of law and thus cause material injury to the petitioner throughout the remainder of the proceedings below, effectively leaving no adequate remedy on appeal. Allstate Ins. Co.'. Langston, 655 So.2d 91, 94 (Fla. 1995); Barad & Co.'. EFTA00233732

McGuire, 670 So.2d 153 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); see, Menke'. Broward School Bd, 916 So.2d 8 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). The requirement of irreparable harm is jurisdictional. Allstate; Barad & Co. A petitioner's failure to demonstrate the satisfaction of this jurisdictional element should result in dismissal of a petition for writ of certiorari. Barad & Co. As shown below, petitioner fails to meet this jurisdictional threshold. 2. Disclosure of the NPA will not cause petitioner irreparable harm. a. There is nothing in the NPA that is confidential and disclosure will not cause petitioner irreparable harm ("there's no cat in the bag"). Petitioner does not cite a single term, provision, sentence or word in the NPA' that is confidential. There are no "confidentiality provisions" in the NPA, contrary to petitioner's misleading assertions (i.e., petition at page 10). There is not a single detail about this sex offender's plea deal with the U.S. Attorney or the state attorney that should be hidden from the public. A page-by-page review of the NPA demonstrates this. The first page discusses that local law enforcement have conducted investigations of The undersigned attorneys were given a copy of the NPA through the federal proceedings before Judge Marra (see E.W.'s response to the petition filed herewith), but, inexplicably, undersigned was not provided a copy of the Addendum. We have never seen it and do not know its contents. 2 EFTA00233733

petitioner; that he was charged by indictment with solicitation of prostitution; that the U.S. Attorney and FBI have conducted their own investigation of his crimes against the United States from 2001-2007 including crimes for inducing minor females to engage in prostitution; conspiring to use interstate commerce to engage in illicit sexual conduct; using interstate commerce to induce minor females to engage in prostitution; traveling in interstate commerce to engage in illicit sexual conduct with minor females; recruiting minors to engage in a commercial sexual act. The second page provides that petitioner wishes to resolve globally his state and federal charges; that the interests of the state, the United States and petitioner would be served by so doing; that prosecution by the U.S. Attorney shall be deferred in favor of prosecution by the state provided petitioner abides by the agreement; that should petitioner violate any conditions of the agreement he may be prosecuted for any offense; that if petitioner fulfills the terms of the agreement, the U.S. Attorney will not prosecute him for any offense. The third page discusses that he will plead guilty to state charges of solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of minors to engage in prostitution and be registered as a sex offender; he will agree to a county jail sentence of 18 months for the two charges followed by 12 months 3 EFTA00233734

community control; the state judge must approve the sentence; the agreement does not preclude petitioner and the state attorney from agreeing to recommend additional charges or additional terms of probation or incarceration; petitioner waives his rights; petitioner shall provide the U.S. Attorney with copies of his agreements with the state attorney. Page four provides that the United States shall provide petitioner with a list of victims; the United States shall select an attorney to represent the victims; if any victims files suit based on federal claims petitioner will not contest them; he is not admitting liability by signing this agreement; that he will use his best efforts to plead guilty by a certain date. Page five provides that he will not be treated differently than any other offender as to county jail gain time; that the parties anticipate this agreement will not be made part of any public record but if there is a Freedom of information Act Request or compulsory process on the United States for this agreement, the U.S. will give petitioner notice before disclosing the agreement; that the U.S. Attorney cannot guarantee what the state attorney does; that the United States will not prosecute potential co- conspirators; that ongoing grand jury proceedings will be halted. 4 EFTA00233735

Page six provides there is consideration for the NPA and a breach allows the United States to elect to terminate it; that petitioner waives certain rights. Finally, page seven provides that petitioner has read the agreement and understands it. Where is there a single confidential term, provision, sentence or word in the NPA the disclosure of which will cause petitioner irreparable harm? The answer is there is none. Will it cause petitioner irreparable harm for the public to learn that he and the U.S. Attorney agreed he will be sentenced in state court to a mere 18 months county jail time (in his home county, not a prison, with all the usual gain time and work release benefits not available in the state prison system, so he serves about 60% of the sentence) plus 12 months non-sexual offender community control, for solicitation of a minor to engage in prostitution, a second degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison, and felony solicitation of prostitution, a third degree felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison? Will it cause petitioner irreparable harm for the public to learn that if petitioner fulfills the terms of the agreement, the U.S. Attorney will not 5 EFTA00233736

prosecute him for a single federal crime he committed against multiple minor female victims? Will it cause petitioner irreparable harm for the public to learn the state attorney will only prosecute him for just two of his crimes involving only just two of his minor female victims and that he does not face any further state prosecution for all his other crimes against the many more minor female victims identified by the U.S. Attorney? Will it cause petitioner irreparable harm for the public to know that the other participants in his criminal enterprise for procuring minor females to engage in prostitution, co-conspirators ill not be prosecuted at all? Will it cause petitioner irreparable harm for the public to learn that an attorney will be appointed to represent his other minor female victims in civil lawsuits; that, if they bring only a single specified federal cause of action, he will not contest, but not admit, liability, but if they bring other causes of action such as battery or intentional infliction of emotional distress, he can defend in any manner he choices? Will it cause petitioner irreparable harm for the public to know that the U.S. Attorney and the state attorney have utterly compromised their roles 6 EFTA00233737

as prosecutors and protectors of the public safety by entering into this sweetheart deal with petitioner? As in the old Wendy's commercial, "Where's the beef?" b. The parties to the NPA did not agree it would be confidential; in fact, the United States agreed the NPA would be publicly disclosed if a Freedom of Information Act Request or compulsory process were made to disclose it. There is nothing in the record to support petitioner's assertion that the parties agreed to confidentiality. Petitioner has not proven by any evidence extrinsic to the NPA that it was intended to be confidential. The wording of the NPA, moreover, does not show it was intended by both parties to be confidential. The NPA on its face does not state anywhere that it is confidential. The word "confidential" does not appear in it. There is not a single term, provision, sentence or word in it where both parties affirmatively agree to keep it confidential. The term "confidential" essentially means that something is "meant to be kept secret." Black's law dictionary (801 ed. 2004). The NPA does not contain an expression of this intent. In fact, the parties to it expressly agree to the contrary: that the United States will disclose the NPA if a Freedom of Information Act Request or compulsory process is made to disclose it: 7 EFTA00233738

The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstein before making that disclosure. (NPA, paragraph 13(emphasis added.) The first sentence of the above quote does no more than state an expectation by both sides that they do not anticipate the document being made part of a public record, i.e., not filed in federal court. At most it states merely an intent that neither side will take affirmative steps to make place it in a public record. But that is not a provision that the document is confidential or that it will be kept confidential. In the same paragraph, the United States agrees to disclose the NPA if a Freedom of Information Act Request or compulsory process for the document is made. In fact, with all the hearings held in state court to the present on this issue, the United States, which was always noticed, has not once intervened in state court to request that the document remain sealed. A representative of the U.S. Attorney's office has not even appeared at any of the hearings before the trial judge below on this issue. Moreover, at the plea colloquy, representatives of the United States were present and did not object to the 8 EFTA00233739

terms of the agreement being discussed on the record or being placed in the state court file (see below).2 Also, the text of the NPA quote above (par. 13) shows that petitioner's arguments based on the supremacy clause and the doctrine of secrecy of grand jury proceedings are wholly without merit. Can these arguments have any conceivable validity if the U.S. Attorney agreed to publicly disclose the NPA if there were a Freedom of Information Act Request or compulsory service of process? There should be no serious consideration given to petitioner's contention that the U.S. Attorney intended to look to petitioner to protect the rights of the United States under the supremacy clause or to protect the sanctity of the doctrine of federal grand jury secrecy. This is but another smoke-screen. c. Petitioner himself and the state prosecutor already publicly disclosed the contents of the NPA ("the cat's already out of the bag"). At the plea colloquy (A-8), with representatives of the U.S. Attorney present, petitioner's attorney and the prosecutor disclosed on the record, in public, the essential terms of the NPA. After the trial judge cautioned 2 It was noted on the record that representatives of the U.S. Attorney were present in court. A-8, page 39, lines 22-23. 9 EFTA00233740

counsel that any sidebar conversation would be on the record, the following exchange occurred: MR. GOLDBERGER [petitioner's counsel]: The reason why I asked to come sidebar is there is a nonprosecution agreement with the United States Attorney's office that triggers as a result of the plea agreement. In other words, they have signed off and said they will not prosecute Mr. Epstein in the Southern District of Florida for any offense upon his successful [sic] taking of this plea today. That is a confidential document that the parties have agreed to. I wanted to tell the court. THE COURT: I understand, that would also be invalidated should he violate community control? MR. GOLDBERGER: Absolutely. That nonprosecution agreement — MS. BELOHLAVEK [the state prosecutor]: They spell all that out. THE COURT: Mr. Epstein needs to come closer. Mr. Epstein, your attorney has told me that in addition to everything, we talked about another inducement, shall we say, to your taking this plea is that the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of the State of Florida, federal prosecutor, has agreed to a nonprosecution agreement with you, meaning that if you successfully complete probation and do everything you're supposed to, they have, have agreed not to prosecute you federally, did you understand that? THE PETITIONER: Yes, ma'am. (A-8, pages 38-39)(emphasis added). We can see from the page-by-page review of the NPA (section 2a. above) that the other provisions of the NPA are incidental to the highlighted quotations. The substance of the NPA is the publicly disclosed provision that the U.S. Attorney will not prosecute petitioner for any federal offense 10 EFTA00233741

upon his pleading guilty to the two state crimes and agreeing to the sentence discussed in the plea colloquy. CONLUSION For the reasons stated above, it is respectfully requested that the petition for certiorari be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing has been served by mail on the parties listed below this 1 day of July, 2009. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is submitted in Times New Roman 14-point font and complies with the font requirement of Rule 9.100. ROTHSTEIN ROSENFELDT ADLER Attorneys for E.W. 50 Willia; J. verger SERVICE LIST Jane Kreusler-Walsh Kreusler-Walsh, Compiani & Vargas, P.A. 11 EFTA00233742

Robert D. Critton Burman, Critton. Jack A. Goldberger Atterbury, Goldberger, & Weiss, P.A. U.S. Attorney's Office-Southern District 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Fl 33401 Honorable Jeffrey Colbath Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 North Dixie Highway Room 11F West Palm Beach. Fl 33401 12 EFTA00233743

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FOURTH DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 4D09-2554 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF FLORIDA, PALM BEACH NEWSPAPERS, INC., E.W., AND B.B., Respondents. SUPPLEMENTAL APPENDIX TO PALM BEACH NEWSPAPERS, INC., d/b/a THE PALM BEACH POST'S RESPONSE TO EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI THOMAS, LOCICERO & BRALOW PL Deanna K. Shullman James B. Lake 101 N.E. 3nd Avenue, Suite 1500 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 EFTA00233744

Document Tab Transcript of June 10, 2009 hearing 1 Administrative Order No. 2.303-9/08 Of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit 2 Administrative Order no. 2.032-10/06 Of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit 3 John Doe I. Museum of Science and History of Jacksonville, Case No. 92-32567, 1994 WL 741009 (Fla. 7th Jud. Cir. June 8, 1994) 4 Government's Response to Victim's Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victim Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771 5 Declaration of In Support of United State's Response to Victim's Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victim Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771 6 Defendants Jeffrey Epstein an Motion for Stay Florida Sugar Cane League. Inc. I. Florida Dept. of Environmental Regulation, Case No. 91-2108 (Fla. 2d Jud. Cir.), Order Releasing Public Records dated September 20, 1991 7 8 2 EFTA00233745

oq-a-3-714 1. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CRIMINAL DIVISION CASE MOs.: 2006-CF9454 AXX and 2008-CP9381 AXX STATE OF FLORIDA, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. PROCEEDINGS HELD BEFORE THE HONORABLE JEFFREY J. COLBATH JUNE 10, 2009 11:08 A.M. - 11:25 A.M. PALM BEACH COUNTY COURTHOUSE WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA Reported by Louanne Rawls Notary Public, State of Florida West Palm Beach Office *100578 EFTA00233746

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 2 APPEARANCES: On On behalf behalf of the JACK ALAN Atterbury, Defendant GOLDBERGER, Goldberger, ESQUIRE et al. of the Defendant ROBERT CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE Burman, Critton, et al. On behalf of Third Party E.W. WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQUIRE BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQUIRE Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler On behalf of Third Party, The Post DEANNA SHULLMAN, ESQUIRE Thomas, LoCiero & Bralow, PL EFTA00233747

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 3 PROCEEDINGS - - SS IT REMEMBERED that the following proceedings were had and testimony adduced before the Honorable Jeffrey Colbath, at the Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm Beach, Florida beginning at the hour of 11:Of a.m. on June 10, 2009, with appearances as herein noted to-wit: THE COURT: State vs. Epstein. Let me have for the record, announce everybody's appearance. MR. BERGER: Your Honor, William J. Horner and Bradley Edwards for non-party E.W. MS. SHULLMAN: Your Honor, Deanne Shullman of Thom, LoCiero a Bralow for non-➢arty The Palm Beach Post. THE COURT: Let me slow down a little bit. On behalf of The Post is? MS. SHULLMAN: Deanna Shullman. THE COURT: S-H-V-L -- MS. SHULLMAN: S-H-U-L-L-K-A-N. THE COURT: Ms. Shullman, good morning. Mr. Borger, gOOd morning. And Hr. Berger, your client is E -- HR. BERGER: E.W., yes. THE COURT: Anybody else here? MR. EDWARDS: Brad Edward■ on behalf of E.N. as well, Judge. Thanks. EFTA00233748

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 4 THE COURT: Last name is spelled? HR. EDWARDS: Edwards. E-D-N-A-R-D-S. THE COURT: Okay. HR. GOLDBERGER: For the other side, Your Honor, Jack Goldberger along with Robert Critton on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. THE COURT: It is the Post's and E.M.'s Motion to Intervene for the purpose of unsealing records? HR. BERGER: Yes, air. THE COURT: Hero's what I think I know, and I tell you this so that you can fill in the gaps of whet you know that I don't know and suggest what you think I ought to do. It appears to me that there was some agreement an agreement that was sealed and then an addendum or amendment to the agreement that was sealed as to documents in the Court's files under seal and it appears as though the punitive interveners want to unseal those and take a peak at them. I don't see where any of the proper procedures to seal the documents was ever followed to begin with. I don't know but it's not jumping out at me when I reviewed the file. So, I'■ thinking that it might be appropriate and the burden might be on the moving party, being the State and Mr. Epstein, to give them the opportunity to jump through the bur -- hoops to seal the documents if they are entitled to have them sealed, then EFTA00233749

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 5 I'll grant that request. If they're not entitled to seal then I'll order it as documents unsealed. Hut that's kind of procedurally where I think the case is. I will allow Mr. Berger and Ms. Shullman to argue if they wish to, otherwise I will go over to Mr. Goldberger and Mr. Critton to perhaps talk about what they think about my suggestion. Mr. Berger? MR. BERGER: I -- I•d like to hear what they say. THE COURT: Ms. Shullman? MS. BHULLMAN: Agreed. THE COURT: Mr. Goldberger? MR. GOLDBHRGER: Your Honor THE COURT: I mean, it looks like they Just handed up an Agreed Order to sign. MR. GOLDBERGER: Well if the Court -- I know the Court is trying to short circuit here and the idea in theory is not horrible, it's not terrible, it's actually not so bad. Hut let me alert the Court to a couple of issues'. First of all, this is not something that came up ahead of time where we were moving to close a hearing or file documents under seal and the Rules of Judicial Administration makes an important distinction between things that are done in advance and things that come up during a hearing and the fact that maybe it goes to the Rule -- talk about situations that arise during the course EFTA00233750

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 6 of a hearing, that the Rules would not apply to that. Secondly, E.W.'s Notion to Intervene is brought under a Rule that does not apply because she brought it under a Rule that applies to non-criminal cases. Having said that I know the Court's desire to get to the issues here and I Just need to alert the Court to one other matter because I think it's really important. The Plaintiff's, E.N., has this agreement already. They have this agreement. Counsel will tell you they have this agreement. There have been two hearings in front of Judge Marra who has the Federal eases here. They moved to unseal the non-prosecution agreement in front of Judge Marra. He entered an initial Order, a very, very well reasoned Order which I have a copy for the Court. THE COURT: Oh, thanks. MR. ooLDSERORR: He entered a very, very well reasoned Order weighing the interest of the Plaintiffs to have access to the non-prosecution agreement with the confidentiality that the parties intended to be part of this agreement. And what he did, he said they can have this agreement. They can review it all they want. If they went to review it with somebody else, they need to give them a copy of this Order that it is not to be disclosed to anyone else. Subsequent to that -- so that's the Rule that's in place right now. Subsequent to that the EFTA00233751

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 7 Plaintiffs went back and said we want to disseminate this order. we want to disseminate this agreement to other parties and Judge Werra entered a second Order denying that request and said, no. My Order is in place but if you have some compelling reason why you want this agreement to be disseminated to others, file a motion and come back to THE COURT: This is as a result of some civil litigation pending in the Pederal Courthouse? MR. GoLDBERGER: Yee. THE COURT' As opposed to any criminal prosecution going on? MR. GOLDBERGER: It is civil proceedings that are going on in Federal Court. But in the interest of comedy, Your Honor, the Court has ruled on the confidentiality agreement and has put a well reasoned procedure into place. If the parties want that agreement unsealed where they need to go is go back to Federal Court and Judge Marra invited them to do so. THE COURT' That may be as it pertains to E.M., but what about The Poet? MR. GOLDBERGER: I think -- and I think I know where the Court is going on this. If The Poet's position is the public haw right to act access to this then there is a procedure in place and ultimately the Court has to conduct EFTA00233752

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 8 a hearing and do the balancing test where you look at whether there is some compelling government interest and that's going to require an evidentiary hearing. So I have no great objection to tiling the Request for Closure and then have a hearing in front of the Court. THE COURT: Well, let's do -- I'm thinking out loud. I'm not ruling. I will give you all a chance to argue further, but this is what I'm thinking I will do, grant the Motion to Intervene. It gives standing to E.X. It gives standing to The eat to contest the fact that these were sealed. And then I will shift the burden back on the State and Defendant, Mr. Epstein, to petition the Court to seal these documents. Until such time that I rule on that I will leave them under seal because they might hove been correctly sealed but the procedure wasn't followed. There's got to be notice. You've got to comply with the Administrative order 2.307. You've got to comply with the Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420(d). I think even though that's a civil it addresses a civil matter this is, you know, in the nature of a civil procedure. So, I'll do that. And thank you for these Orders. So, where do we go fro■ here? I'm thinking out loud, not ruling. Mr. Berger? KR. BERBER: Judge, with all due respect I completely disagree with counsel's characterization of EFTA00233753

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 9 those two Orders. I don't know if he handed up both to You? THE COURT: I do. MR. BERBER: They simply do not say what he tells you they say. THE COURT: I'll read the■ -- MR. BERUER: All right. THE COURT: -- and I'll allow you to make that argument -- MR. BERBER: And -- and THE COURT: -- at the time of tho Renewed Motion to Seal. MR. BERGER: All right. And, also, I don't think the Court -- I think the Court needs to deal with this immediately, expeditiously. This is a matter that the supreme court has placed incredible scrutiny over. And the Rule that we art traveling under -- we're not only traveling under a Rule of Judicial Administration that applies to criminal and civil cases, we're applying to an Administrative Order of this Court that was in place when the sealing was done and that superseded the sealing. THE COURT, I -- MR. BERBER: I'm just saying, I respectfully request that the Court not delay this one minute. THE COURT: You've got the agreements. EFTA00233754

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 10 MR. BERGER: Pardon met THE COURT: You've got the agreements anyway. You've got what's under seal. MR. BERGER: Judge, we cannot do anything with them. THE COURT: Take that up with Judge Marra. MR. BERGER: No, sir. That is not what the Order says. May I quote Judge Marra. •If a specific tangible need arises in a civil case the relief should be sought in that case.• In other words, the civil case■ which are in front of Judge Hefei' is one forum that Judge marra said go to it. Judge Marra did not say that this Court does not have jurisdiction to unseal its own sealed records or to vacate its own Order sealing. And any characterization is -- is false. THE COURT: I'll take a look at it and I'll draw from it what it says -- what I think it says. I appreciate your zealous representation of your client. Please, it appears as though you're yelling at me. NB. SHULLMAN1 Your Honor? THE COURT: Ms. Shullman? MR. BERGER: Judge, Chia happaoss to be a very serious matter and every day of delay delays our discovery. THE COURT: Ms. Shulloan? MS. SHOLLMAN: Your Honor, if I may be heard on the EFTA00233755

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 11 issue as well. As a representative of the public's right of access THE COURT: Right. MS. SHULLMAN: -- here essentially, I would agree With Mr. Berger that we need an immediate hearing on this issue. That's what we're here to do today. I think I heard Your Honor say that he's not clear that the Procedures were applied. My review of the record does not reveal that the procedures were complied with. My review is similar to Your Honor's. It looks like sort of everybody approached the bench and Judge Pucillo said let's take it under seal. If Mr. Epstein's counsel is not prepared to go forward today and meet hia burden, then I would ask thet this Court eet a hearing as soon as practical because the right solution here should be to unseal the records and then, YOU know -- THE COURT: I've crotchet. MS. SHULLMAN: -- and they have to make a motion. THE COURT. Well, what house is on fire? I mean, what is the -- I think what they have to do is they've got to give ten days notice pursuant to the Rule -- the Administrative Order, Rules of Judicial Administration, to go through that process. What -- what prejudice is there? What house is burning down if I say okay. State and defense, go ahead and expeditiously move through the EFTA00233756

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 12 process and lot's get this back on my docket as quickly as possible and give them until Friday to tile their notice and ten days after that we have an evidentiary hearing. I go through the process then. What bad thing is going to happen by waiting these extra twelve to fifteen days? MS. SHOLLMAN: The bad thing that's going to happen, Your Honor, is that the status quo in Florida is that the constitutional right of access is openness. THE COURT: Right. MS. SHULIMAM: You know, certainly if Your Honor is inclined to postpone this hearing I would ask that it be done expeditiously as you suggest. THE COURT: Yeah. MS. SHULLMAN: You know, Friday and then ten days thereafter, it just delays: access for another two weeks and it infringes on our rights. THE COURT: I agree. Mr. Berger, I will In you answer that same question. MR. BERGER: I don't think -- THE COURT: Anything specific rather than -- MR. BERGER: Yes. THE COURT: You know, anything closed that the people are allowed to look at is a transgression and any transgression is bad, but anything unique beyond that? MR. BERGER: Your Honor -- Your Honor, I do not EFTA00233757

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 13 believe chat this Court has the jurisdiction to revisit the propriety of the sealing of these records and give the Defendant or the state, for that matter, a second bite at the apple. If the records are settled improperly, which the Court has said on its face that appears to have occurred, I do not believe that this Court has jurisdiction to allow them a second bite at the apple to go through with the notice requirements. They should have done that in front of Judge Pucillo a year ago and they did not do it. The Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420 simply does not give this Court the right to reactivate the procedure that you outlined. THE COURT; Okay. HR. BERGER: Thank you. THE COURT: Anything further, Hr. Goldberger or Hr. Critton? HR. Gol,DBERGER: Just note, Your Honor, as far as the timing of this and we want to do this expeditiously, of course, this sealing occurred not last week, not two weeks ago, not four months ago but eleven and ono half months ago. The Post reported this last July. So, I understand the right for the pubic to have access and we want to do this as quickly as possible but there is no fire here. There is no house burning. THE COURT: Then I'll go ahead and enter an Order as EFTA00233758

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 14 I've indicated, that is that I'll grant the intervener's Motion to Intervene. You have standing. I will order that the State and/or the defense by noon Friday file a Notice of -- comply with the Administrative order 2.303 and the Judicial Rule -- the Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420, paragraph d, that outlines the procedures to seal files in these types of cases and then we'll get a hearing scheduled for argument on whether or not they will be sealed. Until that time they will remain sealed because Judge wucillo signed off on the Order and I'm not inclined to disturb that until I find more about the merits of the movant's position. MR. GOLDBERGER: Thank you. THE COURT: Anybody want to reduce any of that mess to • written Order? MR. EDWARDS: I'd like to Your Honor. I'd like to know if you're going to give us a hearing date today. THE COURT: I'll deal with that. Yeah. Let me give you some time. How much time do you think it's going to take? I don't think I'm going to have any surprises. How much time do you think we need? A half hour? MR. EDWARDS: Not more. I'd say an hour at the longest. THE COURT: I'm not taking evidence or anything like that. In the meantime, do you agree Lt would be prudent EFTA00233759

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 15 for no to take a look and see what the content of these things are so I can be articulate on what -- their know about? I didn't do that for today's hearing? MR. GOLDBERGER: The defense MR. EDWARDS: The non-prosecution agreement? THE COURT: Right. Whatever is under seal. Whatever it is that's under seal I'll take a look at it so that I Can at least have a feel for apparently what you all know and I don't. HR. OOLDBEROCRe The defense has no objection. THE COURT: Okay. I'll go ahead and road those two sealed documents and I'll see you back here, assuming that. Hr. Goldberger and Mr. Critton gut that done between now and Priday. Ten days from this Friday about we do this on the 25th at 1:30? MR. GOLDBRRGER: Ona moment, Your Honor. That's fine with me. MR. BERGER: Thank you. THE COURT: All right. Great. Thank you so much. NR. GOLDBZROZR: Thank you, Judge. (PROCEEDINGS CONCLUDED) is the 22nd. How EFTA00233760

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Proceedings June 10, 2009 16 CERTIFICATE I, LOUANNE RAWLS, certify that I yea authorised to and did digitally report the foregoing Proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete record of my notes. Dated this 10th day of June, 2009. LOUANN2 RAWLS, 1100578 EFTA00233761

Proceedings June 10, 2009 1 alert 5:18 6:6 allow 5:3 9:8 13:6 allowed 12:23 amendment 4:15 and/or 14:3 announce 3:9 answer arises 10:8 articulate 15:2 assuming 15:12 Atterbury 2:3 Australian 2:3 authorized 16:4 Ave 4:9 5:4,7,8 8:23,24 9:4 9:7,10,13 9:23 10:1,4 10:6,21 11:5 12:17 12:19,21,25 13:14 15:18 beyond 12:24 bit 3:15 bite character... 8:25 10:13 circuit 1:1,1 5:16 civil 7:8,13 8:19 8:19,20 9:19 10:8,9 clear 11:7 client 3:21 10:17 close A acc 7:24 access 6:18 7:24 11:2 12:8 12:15 13:22 addendum 4:14 addresses 8:19 adduced 3:4. Adler 2:12 Administr... 5:22 8:18 9:18 11:22 13:10 14:5 12:18 Anybody 3:23 14:14 anyway 10:2 apparently 2:3 Avenue 2:19 An 1:4,4 a.m 13:3,7 Blvd 2:13 Brad 3:24 Bradley 5:20 closed 12:22 Closure 8:4 Colbath Adainistr... 15:8 1:19,19 3:6 2:11 3:11 1:17 3:4 8:17 9:20 appearance Bra low come B 11:22 14:4 3:9 2:18 3:13 5:23 7:6 back advance appearances brought comedy 5:23 2:1 3:7 7:1,6,18 6:2,3 7:14 ago appears 8:11 12:1 burden compelling 13:9,20,20 4:13,16 15:12 4:22 8:11 7:5 8:2 13:21 10:18 13:5 bad 11:13 complete agree apple 5:18 12:4,6 BUSS= 16:6 11:4 12:17 13:4,7 12:24 2:6 completely 14:25 applied balancing burning 8:25 Agreed 11:8 8:1 11:24 13:24 complied 5:10,14 agreement applies 6:4 9:19 Beach 1:2,20,21,25 C 11:9 comply C 4:13,14,15 apply 2:4,7 3:5,5 8:16,17 14:4 6: 8, 8, 9, 12 6:1,3 3:13 3:1 16:1,1 CONCLUDED 6:18,20,21 applying beginning case 15:21 7:2,5,16,17 9:19 3:6 1:4 5:3 10:8 conduct 15:5 appreciate behalf 10:9 7:25 agreements 10:16 2:2,5,9,16 cases confident... 9:25 10:2 approached 3:15,24 4:5 6:4,11 9:19 6:19 7:15 ahead 11:10 believe 10:9 14:7 constitute.. 5:20 11:25 appropriate 13:1,6 certainly 12:8 13:25 15:11 4:22 bench 12:10 content al argue 11:11 certify 15:1 2:3,6 5:4 8:7 Berger 16:4 contest ALAN argument 2:10 3:10,10 chance 8:10 2:2 9:9 14:8 3:20,21,22 8:7 copy EFTA00233762

Proceedings June 10, 2009 2 6:14,23 correctly 8:15 counsel 6:8 11:12 counsel's 8:25 County 1:2,20 3:5 couple 5:18 course 5:25 13:19 Court 1:1 3:8,15 3:18,20,23 4:1,3,7,10 5:9,11,13 5:15,16,18 6:6,14,15 7:8,11,14 7:15,18,20 7:23,25 8:5 8:6,12 9:3 9:6,8,11,14 9:14,16,20 9:22,24,25 10:2,5,11 10:15,20,24 11:3,14,17 11:19 12:9 12:13,17,20 12:22 13:1 13:5,6,11 13:13,15,25 14:14,18,24 15:6,11,19 Courthouse 1:20 3:5 7:9 Court's 4:16 6:5 criminal 1:3 7:11 9:19 Critton 2:6,6 4:5 5:5 13:16 15:13 D 3:1 14:6 date 14:17 Dated 16:8 day 10:22 16:8 days 11:21 12:3,5 12:14 15:14 deal 9:14 14:18 Deanna 2:17 3:12,17 Defendant 1:13 2:2,5 8:12 13:3 defense 11:25 14:3 15:4,10 delay 9:24 10:22 delays 10:22 12:15 denying 7:3 desire 6:5 digitally 16:5 disagree 8:25 disclosed 6:23 discovery 10:23 disseminate 7:1, 2 disseminated 7:6 distinction 5:22 disturb 14:11 DIVISION 1:3 docket 12:1 documents 4:15,19,25 5:2,21 8:13 15:12 draw 10:15 Drive 2:7 due 8:24 E E 2:13 3:1,1 3:21 16:1,1 Edwards 2:11 3:11,24 3:24 4:2,2 14:16,22 15:5 eleven 13:20 enter 13:25 entered 6:12,16 7:3 entitled 4:25 5:1 Epstein 1:11 3:8 4:6 4:23 8:12 Epstein's 11:12 ESQUIRE 2:2,6,10,11 2:17 essentially 11:4 et 2:3,6 everybody 11:10 everybody's 3:9 evidence 14:24 evidentiary 8:3 12:3 expeditio... 9:15 11:25 12:12 13:18 extra 12:5 4:2 E.W 2:9 3:11,22 3:24 4:7 6:2,7 7:20 8:9 F F 16:1 face 13:5 fact 5:24 8:10 false 10:14 far 13:17 Federal 6:10 7:9,14 7:18 feel 15:8 fifteen 12:5 FIFTEENTH 1:1 file 4:21 5:21 7:6 12:2 14:3 files 4:16 14:7 filing 8:4 fill 4:11 find 14:11 fine 15:16 fire 11:19 13:24 First 5:19 FL 2:4,7,14,21 rlagler 2:7 Florida 1:2,6,21,24 3:5 12:7 followed 4:19 8:15 following 3:3 foregoing 16:5 tort 2:14,21 forum 10:10 forward 11:12 four 13:20 Friday 12:2,14 14:3 15:14,14 front 6:10,12 8:5 10:10 13:8 further 8:8 13:15 G 3:1 gaps 4:11 give 4:23 6:22 8:7 11:21 12:2 13:2 EFTA00233763

Proceedings June 10, 2009 3 10:10,11,21 13:10 14:17 14:18 gives 8:9,10 go hear 5:8 heard 10:25 11:6 hearing 5:22 6:7 improperly 13:4 inclined 12:11 14:10 11:11 13:9 14:10 15:20 Judicial 1:1 5:21 LoCiero 2:18 3:13 longest 14:23 look 5:5 7:18,18 5:20,24 6:1 incredible 8:18 9:18 8:1 10:15 8:22 10:11 8:1,3,5 9:16 11:22 13:10 12:23 15:1 11:12,23,25 11:5,14 indicated 14:5,5 15:7 12:4 13:7 12:3,11 14:1 July looks 13:25 15:11 14:7,17 infringes 13:21 5:13 11:10 goes 15:3 12:16 jump Louanne 5:24 hearings initial 4:24 1:23.16:4,11 going 6:10 6:12 jumping loud 7:12,14,23 HELD intended 4:20 8:6,22 8:3 12:4,6 1:16 6:19 June 14:17,19,20 Honor interest 1:18 3:6 14 Goldberger 3:10,12 4:4 6:17 7:14 16:8 Marra 2:2,3 4:4,5 5:12 7:15 8:2 jurisdiction 6:10,12 7:3 5:5,11,12 10:19,25 Intervene 10:12 13:1,6 7:19 10:5,7 5:15 6:16 11:7 12:7 4:8 6:2 8:9 10:10,11 K 7:10,13,22 12:10,25,25 14:2 matter kind 13:15,17 13:17 14:16 interveners 6:6 8:19 14:13 15:4 15:16 4:17 5:2 9:15 10:22 15:10,13,16 Honorable intervener's know 13:3 15:20 1:17 3:4 14:1 6:10,11,12 mean good Honor's invited 4:20 5:15 5:13 11:19 3:20,21 11:10 7:19 6:5 7:22 meet gotcha hoops issue 8:20 9:1 11:13 11:17 4:24 11:1,6 11:16 12:10 merits government horrible issues 12:14,22 14:11 8:2 5:17 5:19 6:5 14:17 15:2 MOOS grant hour 15:8 14:14 5:1 8:8 14:1 3:6 14:21,22 minute great house 9.24 Las 8:4 15:19 11:19,24 1:17 2:10,11 moment 13:24 3:10 2:13 15:16 hur Jack Lauderdale months Hafele 4:24 2:2 4:5 2:14,21 13:20,21 10:10 Jeffrey leave morning I half 1.11,17 3:4 8:14 3:20,21 idea 13:20 14:21 4:6 let's motion handed 5:16 JA 8:6 11:11 4:7 6:2 7:6 5:13 9:1 immediate 2:6 12:1 8:9 9:11 happen 11:5 Judge litigation 11:18 14:2 12:5,6 ' immediately 3:25 6:10,12 7:9 movant's happens 9:15 7:3,18 8:24 little 14:12 10:21 important 10:4,5,7,10 3:15 move EFTA00233764

Proceedings June 10, 2009 4 11:25 moved 6:11 moving 4:22 5:20 N N 2:7 3:1 name 4:1 nature 8:20 need 6:6,22 7:18 10:8 11:5 14:21 needs 9:14 non-criminal 6:4 non-party 3:11,13 non-prose... 6:11,18 15:5 noon 14:3 NOs 1:4 Notary 1:24 note 13:17 noted 3:7 notes 16:6 notice 8:16 11:21 12:2 13:8 14:3 N.S 2:19 O O 3:1 objection 8:4 15:10 occurred 13:5,19 Office 1.25 Oh 6:15 okay 4:3 11:24 13:13 15:11 Olas 2:13 openness 12:8 opportunity 4:24 opposed 7:11 order 5:2,14 6:13 6:13,17,23 7:2,3,4 8:17 9:20 10:6,13 11:22 13:25 14:2,4,10 14:15 Orders 8:21 9:1 ought 4:12 outlined 13:12 outlines 14:6 P P 3:1 Palm 1:2,20,21,25 2:4,7 3:5,5 3:13 paragraph 14:6 Pardon 10:1 part 6:19 parties 6:19 7:3,17 party 2:9,16 4:23 peak 4:18 pending 7:9 people 12:23 pertains 7:20 petition 8:12 PL 2:18 place 6:25 7:4,17 7:25 9:20 placed 9:16 Plaintiff 1:8 Plaintiffs 6:17 7:1 Plaintiff's 6:7 Please 10:17 position 7:23 14:12 possible 12:2 13:23 Post 2.16 3:14,16 7:21 8:10 13:21 postpone 12:11 Post's 4:7 7:23 practical 11:14 prejudice 11:23 prepared 11:12 procedurally 5:3 procedure 7:16,25 8:15 8:20 13:11 procedures 4:19 11:7,9 14:6 proceedings 1:16 3:3 7:13 15:21 16:5 process 11:23 12:1,4 proper 4:18 propriety 13:2 prosecution 7:11 prudent 14:25 pubic 13:22 public 1:24 7:24 11:1 Pucillo 11:11 13:9 14:10 punitive 4:17 Purpose 4:8 pursuant 11:21 put 7:16 question 12:18 quickly 12:1 13:23 Quo 12:7 quote 10:7 It 3:1 16:1 Rawls 1:23 16:4,11 reactivate 13:11 read 9:6 15:11 really 6:7 reason 7:5 reasoned 6:13,17 7:16 record 3:9 11:8 16:6 records 4:8 10:12 11:15 13:2 13:4 reduce 14:14 relief 10:8 remain 14:9 WIREMPERED 3:3 Renewed 9:11 report 16:5 reported 1:23 13:21 represent... 10:17 represent... 11:1 request EFTA00233765

Proceedings June 10, 2009 5 5:1 7:4 8:4 9:23 require 8:3 requirements 13:8 respect 8:24 respectfully 9:23 result 7:8 reveal 11:8 review 6:21,22 11:8 11:9 reviewed 4:21 revisit 13:1 right 6:25 7:24 9:7,13 11:1 11:3,14 12:8,9 13:11,22 15:6,19 rights 12:16 Robert 2:6 4:5 Rosenfeldt 2:12 Rothstein 2:12 rule 5:25 6:3,4 6:24 8:13 8:18 9:17 9:18 11:21 13:10 14:5 14:5 ruled 7:15 Rules 5:21 6:1 11:22 ruling 8:7,22 S 3:1 4:7 6:2 saying 9:23 says 10:7,16,16 scheduled 14:8 scrutiny 9:16 seal 4:16,19,24 5:1,21 8:13 8:14 9:12 10:3 11:11 14:6 15:6,7 sealed 4:14,15,25 8:11,15 10:12 13:4 14:9,9 15:12 sealing 9:21,21 10:13 13:2 13:19 second 7:3 13:3,7 Secondly 6:2 See 4:18 15:1,12 serious 10:22 set 11:14 shift 8:11 short 5:16 Shuliman 2:17 3:12,12 3:17,17,19 3:20 5:4,9 5:10 10:19 10:20,24,25 11:4,18 12:6,10,14 side 4:4 sign 5:14 signed 14:10 similar 11:9 simply 9:4 13:10 sir 4:9 10:6 situations 5:25 slow 3:15 solution 11:15 somebody 6:22 soon 11:14 sort 11:10 sought 10:8 South 2:3 specific 10:7 12:20 spelled 4:1 standing 8:9,10 14:2 State 1:6,24 3:8 4:23 8:12 11:24 13:3 14:3 status 12:7 Ste 2:7 Subsequent 6:24,25 suggest 4:12 12:12 suggestion 5:6 Suite 2:3,13,20 superseded 9:21 Supreme 9:16 surprises 14:20 3:18' S-H-U-L-L... 3:19 T T 16:1,1 take 4:17 10:5,15 11:11 14:20 15:1,7 talk 5:6,25 tangible 10:7 tell 4:10 6:9 tells 9:4 ten 11:21 12:3 12:14 15:14 terrible 5:17 test 8:1 testimony 3:4 thank 8:21 13:14 14:13 15:18 15:19,20 thanks 3:25 6:15 theory 5:17 thing 12:4,6 things 5:23,23 15:2 think 4:10,12 5:3 5:6 6:7 7:22,22 8:18 9:13 9:14 10:16 11:6,20 12:19 14:19 14:20,21 thinking 4:21 8:6,8 8:22 Third 2:9,16 Thomas 2:18 3:13 time 5:20 8:13 9:11 14:9 14:19,19,21 timing 13:18 today 11:6,13 14:17 today's 15:3 to-wit 3:7 transcript 16:6 transgres... 12:23,24 traveling 9:17,18 true 16:6 EFTA00233766

Proceedings June 10, 2009 6 trying 5:16 twelve 12:5 two 6:10 9:1 12:15 13:19 15:11 types 14:7 6:17 went 7:1 West 1:21,25 2:4 2:7 3:5 we'll 14:7 we're 9:17,19 11:6 William 2:10 3:10 wish 5:4 words 10:9 written 14:15 1:19 1400 2:3 1500 2:20 1650 2:13 515 2:7 2 2.303 8:17 14:4 2.420 13:10 14:6 2.420(d) 8:18 2006-C19454 1:4 2008-C19381 1.4 2009 1:18 3:6 16:8 22nd 15:14 25th 15:15 250 2.3 17 ultimately 7:25 understand 13:22 unique 12:24 unseal 4:17 6:11 10:12 11:15 unsealed 5:2 7:17 unsealing 4:8 Yeah 12:13 14:18 year 13:9 yelling 10:18 1 vacate 10:13 VS 1:9 3:8 z zealous 10:17 3 3rd 2.19 W #100570 33301-1181 waiting 1:25 16:11 2:21 12:5 33394 want 1 2.14 4:17 6:21,22 1830 33401 7:1,2,5,17 15:15 2:4 13:18,23 10 33401-4349 14:14 1:18 3:6 2:7 wasn't 10th 8:15 16:8 4 week 101 400 13:19 2:19 2:7 weeks 11:00 401 12:15 13:20 1:19 3:6 2:13 weighing 11:25 EFTA00233767

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR FAIR BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CRDDNAI. DIVISION STATE OF FLORIDA, Plaintiff, vo. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. PROCEEDINGS HELD BEFORE THE HONORARTI. JEFFREY j COLHATH JUNE 10, 2009 11:00 A.M. - 11:25 DAUS BEACH coutent COURTHOUSE WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA Reported by Doyenne Pawls Notary Public, State of Florida West Palm Beach Office *100578 EFTA00233768

Proceedings June 10, 2009 APPEARANCES: On behalf of the Defendant JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE Atterbury, Goldberger, et al. On behalf of the Defendant ROBERT CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE Burman, rr4tfnn or al. 1 1 1 1 14 15 1 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2 2 On behalf of Third Party E.W. WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQUIRE BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQUIRE Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler On behalf of Third Party, The Post DEANNA SHULLMAN, ESQUIRE Thomas, LoCiero & EFTA00233769

Proceedings June 10, 2009 PROCEEDINGS BE IT REMEMBERED that the following proceedings wore had and testimony adduced before the Honorable Jeffrey COlbath. at the Palm Beach County Courthouse, West Palm BeaCh, Florida beginning at the hour of 11:08 a.m. On June 10, 2009, with appearances as herein noted to-wit: THE COURT: State vs. Epstein. Let se have for the record, announce everybody's appearance. I . BERGER: Your Honor, William J. Borger and Bradley Edwards for non- party B.W. Y4, PRILLOGN, Your Honor. Mavis Shalloan or Thaws. LoCiero a °Taloa for non-party The Pa 1 n beach Post. THE COURT: Lot re slow down a little bit. On behalf of The Post is? MS. RIPUIJ.MN: Deanna Shullman. THE COURT: S-H-U- I.. - MS. SHULLMAN: S-H-U-L-L-M-A-N. THE COURT: Ma. Shullman, good morning. Hr. Borger, good morning And Mr. Berger, your client is B - M. StRGE.P. L.N.. yOO THE COURT: Anybody tie. here? MR ESPORng: Brad Edwards on behalf of B.W. as well, Judge Thanks. EFTA00233770

Proceedings June 10, 2009 THE COURT: Last name is spelled? KM. MUMS: Edwards. a-A-R-0-S. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GOLDBERGER: For the other aide, Your Honor, Jack Goldberger along with Robert Critton co behalf of Jeffrey Epstein. 11IE COURT: It is the Post's and E.S.'s Motion to Intervene for the purpose of unsealing records? MM. bERCSA! Yee, Sir. THE COURT: Here's what I think I know. and I tell you this so that you can fill in the gaps of what you know that I don't know and suggest what you think I ought to do. It appears to me that there was sure agreement -- an agreement that was sealed and then an addendum or amendment to the agreement that was sealed as to documents in the Court's files under seal and it appears as though the punitive interveners want to unseal those and take a peak at them. I don't see where any of the proper procedures to seal the documents was ever followed to begin with. I don't know but it's not jumping out at me when I reviewed the file. So, I'm thinking that it might be appropriate and the burden might be on the sieving party, being the State and Mr. Epstein, to give them the opportunity to lump through the hur -- hoops to seal the documents if they are entitled to have them sealed, then EFTA00233771

Proceedings June 10, 2009 I'll grant that request. If they're not entitled to seal then I'll order at as documents unsealed. But that'S kind of procedurally where I think the case is. I will allow Mr. Berger and Ma. Shullman to argue if they wish to, otherwise I wall go over to Mr. Goldberger and Mr. Critton to perhaps talk about what they think about my suggestion. Mr. Berger? MR. BERGER, I -- I'd like to hear what they say. THE COURT: Hs Shull:man? HZ. SHULLXAM: Agro.04. THE COURT: Mr. Goldberger? MR. GOLDBERGER: Your Honor - THE COURT: I mean, it looks like they just handed up an Agreed Order to sign. MR. GOLDBERGER: Well, if the Court -- I know the Court is trying to short circuit here and the idea in theory is not horrible, it's not terrible, it's actually not so bad. But let me alert the Court to a couple Of locusts. First of all, this is not something that came up ahead of time whore we wore moving to close a hearing or file documents under seal and the Rules of Judicial Administration makes an important distinction between things that aro done in advance and things that come up during a hearing and the fact that maybe at goes to the Rule -- talk about situations that arise during the course EFTA00233772

Proceedings June 10, 2009 of a hearing, that the Rules would not apply to that. Secondly. If.W.'s Motion to Intervene is brought under a Rule that does not apply because she brought it under a Rule that applies to non-criminal cases. Having said that I know the Court's desire to get to the issues here and I just need to alert the Court to one other matter because I think its really important. The Plaintiff's, E.W., has this agreement already. They have this agreement. counsel will tell you they have this agreement. There have been two hearings in front of Judge Marra who has the Federal cases here. They moved to unseal the non- prosecution agreement in front of Judge Marra. He entered an initial Order, a very, very well reasoned order which I have a copy for the Court. THE OOJRT: Oh. thanks. MR. GOLDBERGER: He entered a very, very well reasoned order weighing the interest of the Plaintiffs to have access to the non-prosecution agreement with the confidentiality that the parties intended to be part of this agreement. And what he did, he said they can have this agreement. They can review it all they want. If they want to review it with somebody else, they need. to give them a copy of this Order that it is not to be disclosed to anyone else. Subsequent to that -- so that'S the Rule that's in place right now. Subsequent to that the EFTA00233773

Proceedings June 10, 2009 Plaintiffs went back and said we want to disseminate this Order. We want to disseninate this agreement to other parties and Judge Marra entered a second Order denying that request and said, no. My Order is in place but if you have some cospolling reason why you want this agreement to be disseminated to others. file a notion and cane beck to THE COVRT: This is as a result of some civil litigation pending in the Federal Courthouse? MR. OCILDBF2CER: Yes THE COURT: As opposed to any criminal prosecution going on? MR. GOLDBERGER, It is civil proceedings that are going on in Federal Court. But in the interest of comedy. Your Honor, the Court has ruled on the confidentiality agreement and has put a well reasoned procedure into place. If the parties want that agreement unsealed where they reed to go is go back to Federal Court and Judge Yarra invited them to do so. THE ODUPT: That may be as it pertains to S.W., but what about The Post? MR. COLCHEICAM: I think -- and I think I know where the Court is going on this. The Post's position is the public has right to acc access to this then there is a procedure in place and ultimately the Court has to conduct EFTA00233774

Proceedings June 10, 2009 a hearing and do the balancing teat where you look at whether there is are compelling government interest and that's going to require an evidentiary hearing. So I have no great objection to filing the Request for Closure and then have a hearing in front of the Court. TICE COURT: Well, let's do -- I'm thinking out loud. I'm not ruling. I will give you all a chance to argue further, but this is what I'm thinking I will do. grant the Motion to Intervene. It gives standing to E.W. It gives standing to The Post to contest the fact that these were sealed. And then I will shift the burden back on the State and DeferdAnt, Mr. Epstein, to petition the Court to seal these documents. Until such time that I rule on that I will leave them under seal because they might have been correctly sealed but the procedure wasn't followed. There's got to be notice. You've got to comply with the Administrative order 2.303. You've got to comply with the Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420(O). I think oven though that's a civil -- it addresses a civil matter this is, you know, in the nature of a civil procedure. So. I'll do that. And thank you for these Orders. So, where do we go from here? I'm thinking out loud, not ruling. ld. Berger? MR BURGER: Judge, with all due respect I completely disagree with counsel's characterization of EFTA00233775

Proceedings June 10, 2009 those two Orders. I don't know if he handed up both to you') THE COURT: i do. PER. BERGER: They 'limply do not nay what ha tells you they aay. THE COURT: read them -RR. BERGER: All right, THE COURT: -- and I'll allow you to make that argument - MR. BERGER: And -- end - THE COURT: -- at the tine of the Renewed Ration to Seal. 'R.R. BERGER: All right. And, also, I don't think the Court -- I think the Court needs to deal with this immediately. expeditiously. This is a matter that the Supreme Court has placed incredible scrutiny over. And the Rule that we are traveling under -- we're not only traveling under a Rule Of Judicial Administration that applies to criminal and civil cases, we're applying to an Administrative Order of this Court that was in place when the sealing was done and that superseded the sealing. THE COURT: I - Jai BERGER 'm just saying, I respectfully request that the Court not delay this one minute. THE COURT: You've get the agreements. EFTA00233776

Proceedings June 10, 2009 1 MR. ➢ERGER: Pardon me? THE COURT: You've got the agreements anyway. You've got what•s under seal. BinimiR: Judge, we cannot do anything with then THE COURT: Take that up with ✓Udgc Marra. MR. ➢EAGER: No, sir. That is not %Tat the Order says. May I quote Judge Marra. 'If a specific tangible need arises in a civil case the relief should be sought in that case.' In other words, the Civil cases which are in front of Judge Hafele is one forum that Judge Marra said go to it. Judge Marra did not say that this Court does not have Jurisdiction to unseal its own sealed records or to vacate its own order scaling. And any characterisation is -- is false. THE COURT: I'll take a look at it and I.11 draw from it what it says -. what I think it says. I appreciate your zealous representation of your client. Please, it appears as though you're yelling at me. MS. SHULUVVi: Your Honor? THE (tORT: Ms. Shullnan? MR. ➢PJtCER: Judge, this happens to be a very serious patter and ovary day of delay delays our discovery. THE COURT: YS. Shullman? MS. SRUL:MAN: Your Honor, it I may be heard on the EFTA00233777

Proceedings June 10, 2009 1 issue as well. As a representative of the public's right of access - THE COURT: Right. MS. SHUI1NAN, -- here essentially, I would agree with Mr. Borger that we need an immediate hearing on this issue. That's what we're here to do today. I think I hoard Your Honor say that he's not clear that the procedures wore applied. My review of the record doom not reveal that the procedures wore complied with. My review is similar to Your Honor's. It looks like sort of everybody approached the bench and Judge Pucillo said let's take it under seal. If Mr. Epstein's counsel is not prepared to go forward today and meet his burden, then I would ask that this Court set a hearing as soon am practical because the right solution here should be to unseal the records and then, you knew - THE COURT: I've gotcha. MS. SHULLMAN: -- and they have to make a motion. THE COURT: Well, what house is on fire? 1 mean, what is the -. I think what they have to do is they've got to give ten days notice pursuant to the Rule -- the AdMinistrative Order, Rules of Judicial Araninistration, to go through that process. What -- what prtoudloo is there? What house is burning down if I say okay. State and defense, go ahead and expeditiously move through the EFTA00233778

Proceedings June 10, 2009 1 2 process and let', got this back on my docket as quickly as possible and give them until Friday to file their notice and ten days after that we have an evidentiary hearing. I go through the process then. %Mat bad thing is going to happen by waiting those extra twelve to fifteen days? MS. SHVLBIAN: The bad thing that's going to happen, Your honor. a that the statue quo in Florida is that the constitutional right of access as openness. THE COURT Right. HS. SHULISUH, You know, certainly it Toms Honor le snellnard to postpone this hearing scald ask that it be done expeditlevoly as you suggest. TIM COUP?, Yeah. MS. SWILISENH; You know, Fridley and then ton days thereafter, at just delays access for another two weeks and it infringes on our rights. THE COURT: I agree. Hr. Borger, I will lot you answer that same question. MR. BERGER I don't think - THE COURT: Anything specific rather than -MR. BERGER: Yes. THE COURT: You know, anything closed that the people are allowed to look at is a transgression and any transgression is bad, but anything unique beyond that? HA. UtACCA. Your senor -- Your Honor. : do not EFTA00233779

Proceedings June 10, 2009 1 believe that this Court has the Jurisdiction to revisit the propriety of the sealing of these records and give the Defendant or the State, for that matter, a second bite at the apple. It the records are sealed improperly, which the Court has said on its face that appears to have occurred, I do not believe that this Court has jurisdiction to allow them a second bite at the apple to go through with the notice requirements. They should have done that in front of Judge Pucillo a year ago and they did not do it. The Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420 simply does not give this Court the right to reactivate the procedure that you outlined. THE °DIRT: Okay. )R. OXRCIERI :bank you. THE COURT: Anything further. gr. Goldberger or Mr. Critton? MR. GOLDBERG ER: Jun note, Your Honor, as far as the timing of this and we want to do this expeditiously, of COULSO. this sealing occurred not last week, not two rooks ago, not four months ago but eleven and one halt months ago. The Post reported this last July. SO, 7, understand the right for the pubic to have access and we want to do this as quickly as possible but there is no fire here. There is no house burning. THE COURT: Then I'll go ahead and enter an Order as EFTA00233780

Proceedings June 10, 2009 I've indicated, that is that I'll grant the Intervener'. Motion to Intervene. You have standing. I will order that the State and/cm the deign by noon Friday file a Notice of -- only with the Administrative Order 2.303 and the Jbdicial Rule -- the Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420, paragraph d, that outline* the prof:One. to seal file, in tbama type. of ease. and then we'll pot a blaming andnleci for ~want on whether or not they will be misled. Until that time they vill inain .waled because Judge Sunlit° *limed off on the order and I'm not inclined to disturb that until I find more nut the ~It. of the movant'm position. ML flana you. TIM COURT: Anybody want to reduce any of that seas to a written Order? Wt. EDWARDS: I'd like to Your honor. I'd like to know if you're going to give us a hearing date today. TSB COURT: I'll deal with that. Yeah. 1st ma give you some time. Now much time do you think it's going to take? I don't think I'm going to have any surprl000. Nov such time do you think we and? A half hour? M. EDWARDS: Not moms. I'd say an hour at the longest. IRE COURT: I'm not taking evAchance or anything like that. In the meantime, do you ours. It would be prudent EFTA00233781

Proceedings June 10, 2009 1 for me to take a look and see what the content of these things are so I can be articulate on what -- their know about? I didn't do that for today's hearing? MR. GOLDBLAGMR: The defense - MR. Eowa.PDS, The non-prosecution agreiseantl THE COURT: Right. whatever is under seal. Whatever it is that's under seal I'll take a look at it so that I can at least have a feel for apparently what you all know and I don't. MR. OOtDBRRG£R: The defense has no objection. THE COURT: Okay. I'll go ahead and read those two sealed documents and I'll see you back hero, assuming that Mr. Goldberger and Mr. Crittce get that done between now and Friday. Ten days from this Friday is the 22nd. How about we do this on the 25th at 1:30? 1G. G0IDB£RGIR: One moment. Your uonor That'll fine with SO. MR. B£RGER Thank you. C0LIM: AII fight. Great 'Munk you so 'Lull. NA COLCOXRGUR: Thank you, Judge. I CR0CERDMICS COHCLUUra) EFTA00233782

Proceedings June 10, 2009 1 CLATIFICATIt I, Latakia RAMS, certify that I vs. authorised to and did digitally report the foregoing proceedings and that the transcript is a tree and Caplets record of ay notes. Dated this 10th day of June, 2009. LC AN RIMS, 1100511 EFTA00233783

Proceedings June 10, 200 9 A acc 7:24 access 6:18 1:24 11:2 12:8 12:15 13:22 addendum 4:14 add 8:19 adduced 3:4 . Adler 2:12 Administr... 5:22 8:18 9:18 11:22 13:10 14:5 Administr... 8:17 9:20 11:22 14:4 advance 5:23 ago 13:9,20,20 13:21 agree 11:4 12:17 14:25 Agreed 5:10 14 agreement alert 5:18 6:6 allow 5:3 9:8 allowed 12:23 amendment 4:15 and/or 14:3 announce 3:9 answer 12:18 Anybody 3:23 14:14 anyway 10:2 apparently 15:8 appearance 3:9 appearances 2:1 3:7 appears 4:13,16 10:18 13:5 apple 13:4,7 applied 11:8 li 4 9 19 6 4:13,14 15 12 6:8 8 6:1,3 app es arises 10:8 4:9 5:4,7,8 8:23,24 9:4 1 character... 8:25 10:13 articulate 9:7,10,13 circuit 13:6 15:2 9:23 10:1,4 1:1,1 5:16 assuming 10:6,21 civil 15:12 11:5 12:17 7:8,13 8:19 Atterbury 12:19,21,25 8:19,20 2:3 Australian 2:3 authorized 16:4 Ave 2:3 Avenue 2:19 Ars 1:4,4 1:19,19 3:6 B back 7:1,6,18 8: 11 12: 1 15: 12 bad 5: 18 12:4, 6 12 :24 balancing 8: 1 Beach apply 3:13 1:2 20 21 25 13:14 15:18 beyond 12:24 bit 3:15 bite 13:3,7 Blvd 2:13 Brad 3:24 Bradley 2:11 3:11 Bralow 2:18 3:13 brought 6:2,3 burden 4:22 8:11 11:13 Burman 2:6 burning 11:24 13:24 C 2:4,7 3:5,5 3:1 16:1,1 9:19 10:8,9 clear 11:7 client 3:21 10:17 close 5:20 closed 12:22 Closure 8:4 Colbath 1:17 3:4 come 5:23 7:6 comedy 7:14 compelling 7:5 8:2 complete 16:6 completely 8:25 complied 11 9 • m 1 p CO y C 8:16,17 14:4 CONCLUDED EFTA00233784

Proceedings June 10, 2009 2 6:14,23 D 1:3 correctly d docket 8:15 3: 1 14: 6 12:1 counsel date documents evidence find 14:24 14:11 evidentiary fine 8:3 12:3 15:16 6:8 11:12 14:17 4:15,19,25 expeditio... fire counsel's Dated 5:2,21 8:13 9:15 11:25 11:19 13:24 8:25 16:8 15:12 12:12 13:18 First County day draw extra 5:19 .1:2,20 3:5 10:22 16: 8 10:15 12:5 FL couple days Drive 2:4,7,14,21 5:18 11:21 12:3,5 2:7 4:2 Flagler Course 12:14 15: 14 due E.W 2:7 5:25 13:19 deal 8:24 2:9 3:11,22 Florida Court 9: 14 14: 18 3:24 4:7 1:2,6,21,24 15 it 6:2,7 7:20 3:5 12:7 1:1 3:8 Deanna 20 3:18 23 4:1 3 2:13 3:1 4:19 8:15 7 1 10 2:17 3:12 17 8:9 followed 11 13 5:9 Defendant 1:13 5 5:15,16,18 8:12 13:3 6:6,14,15 defense 7:8,11,14 11:25 14:3 7:15,18,20 15:4 10 3:21 16:1 1 following 2:2 Edwards r 3:3 2:11 3:11,24 16:1 foregoing 3:24 4:2,2 face 16:5 14:16,22 13:5 Fort 7:23,25 8:5 . 15:5 fact 2:14,21 delay 8:6,12 9:3 9:24 10:22 eleven 5:24 8:10 forum 9:6,8,11,14 delays 13:20 false 10:10 9:14,16,20 10:22 12:15 enter 10:14 forward 9:22,24,25 denying 13:25 far 11:12 10:2,5,11 entered 13:17 four 10:15,20,24 7:3 6:12,16 7:3 Federal 13 20 11:3,14,17 desire entitled 6:10 7:9 14 Frida EFTA00233785

Proceedings 13:10 14:17 14:18 gives 8:9, 10 go 5:5 7:18,18 8:22 10:11 11:12,23,25 12:4 13:7 13:25 15:11 goes 5:24 going 7:12,14,23 8:3 12:4,6 14:17,19,20 Goldberger 2:2,3 4:4,5 5:5,11,12 5:15 6:16 7:10,13,22 13:15,17 14:13 15:4 15:10,13,16 15:20 good 3:20,21 gotcha 11:17 government 8:2 grant 5:1 8:8 14:1 great 8:4 15:19 H Hskk 10:10 half 13:20 14:21 handed 5:13 9:1 happen 12:5,6 happens 1021 hear 5:8 heard 10:25 11:6 hearing 5:20,24 6:1 8:1,3,5 11:5, 14 12:3,11 14:7, 17 15:3 hearings 6:10 mao 1:16 Honor 3:10,12 4:4 5:12 7:15 10:19,25 11:7 12:7 12:10,25,25 13:17 14:16 15:16 Honorable 1:17 3:4 Honor's 11:10 hoops 4:24 horrible 5:17 hour 3:6 14:21,22 house 11:19,24 13:24 hur 4:24 idea 5:16 immediate 11:5 immediately 9:15 important 5:22 6:7 improperly 13:4 inclined 12:11 14:10 incredible 9:16 , indicated 14:1 infringes 12:16 initial 6:12 intended 6:19 interest 6:17 7:14 8:2 Intervene 4:8 6:2 8:9 14:2 interveners 4:17 mntervener's 14:1 invited 7:19 issue 111,6 issues 5:19 6:5 J 1:17 2:10,11 3:10 Jack 2:2 4:5 Jeffrey 1:11,17 3:4 4:6 JR 2:6 Judge 3:25 6:10,12 7:3,18 8:24 10:4,5,7,10 10:10,11,21 11:11 13:9 14:10 15:20 Judicial 1:1 5:21 8:18 9:18 11:22 13:10 14:5,5 July 13:21 4:24 jumping 4:20 June 1:18 3:6 16:8 jurisdiction 10:12 13:1,6 a kind 5:2 know 4:10,11,12 4:20 5:15 6:5 7:22 8:20 9:1 11:16 12:10 12:14,22 14:17 15:2 15:8 L Las 2:13 Lauderdale 2:14,21 leave 8:14 let's 8:6 11:11 12:1 litigation : 9 little 3:15 June 10, 2009 LoCiero 2:18 3:13 longest 14:23 look 8:1 10:15 12:23 15:1 15:7 looks 5:13 11:10 Louanne 1:23 16:4,11 loud 8:6,22 Marra 6:10,12 7:3 7:19 10:5,7 10:10,11 matter 6:6 8:19 9:15 10:22 13:3 mean 5:13 11:19 moat 11:13 merits 14:11 mess 14:14 minute 9:24 moment 15:16 months 13:20,21 morning 3:20,21 motion 4:7 6:2 7:6 8:9 9:11 11:18 14:2 movant's 14:12 move EFTA00233786

Proceedings June 10, 2009 4 11:25 noved 6:11 noving 4:225:20 N N 2:7 3:1 name 4:1 nature 8:20 need 6:6,22 7:18 10:8 11:5 14:21 needs 9:14 non-criminal 6:4 non-party 3:11,13 non-prose... 6:11,18 15:5 noon 14:3 NOS 1:4 Notary 1:24 note 13:17 noted 3.7 notes 16:6 not1C4 8:16 11:21 12:2 13:8 14:3 N.8 2:19 O O 3:1 objection 8:4 15:10 occurred 13:5,19 Office 1:25 Oh 6:15 okay 4:3 11:24 13:13 15:11 Olas 2:13 openness 12:8 opportunity 4:24 opposed 7:11 order 5:2,14 6:13 6:13,17,23 7:2,3,4 8:17 9:20 10:6,13 11:22 13:25 14:2,4,10 14:15 Orders 8:21 9:1 6:7 public's 14:14 ought Please 11:1 relief 4:12 10:17 Pucillo 10:8 outlined position 11:11 13:9 remain 13:12 7:23 14:12 14:10 14:9 outlines possible punitive RWC8O8RED 14:6 12:2 13:23 4:17 3:3 Poet purpose Renewed 2:16 3:14,16 4:B 9:11 7:21 8:10 pursuant report 3:1 13:21 11:21 16:5 Palm postpone put reported 1:2,20,21,25 2:4,7 3:5,5 3:13 paragraph 14:6 Pardon 10:1 part 6:19 parties 6:19 7:3,17 party 2:9,16 4:23 peak 4:18 pending 7:9 people 12:23 pertains 7:20 petition 8:12 PL 2:18 place 6:25 7:4,17 7:25 9:20 placed 9:16 Plaintiff 1:8 Plaintiffs 6:17 7:1 Plaintiff's 11:23 prepared 11:12 procedurally 5:3 procedure 7:16,25 8:15 8:20 13:11 procedures 4:19 11:7,9 14:6 proceedings 1:16 3:3 7:13 15:21 16:5 process 11:23 12:1, proper 4:18 propriety 13:2 prosecution 7:11 prudent 14:25 pubic 13:22 public 1:24 7:24 12:1 13:23 quo 12:7 quote 10:7 R 3:1 16:1 Rawls 1:23 16:4,11 reactivate 13:11 read 9:6 15:11 really 4 6.7 reason 7:5 reasoned 6:13,17 7:16 record 3:9 11:8 16:6 records 4:8 10:12 11:15 13:2 13:4 reduce 12:11 Post's 4:7 7:23 practical 11:14 prejudice 7:16 question 12:18 quickly 1:23 13:21 represent... 10:17 represent... 11:1 request EFTA00233787

Proceedings 5:1 7:4 8:4 9:23 require 8:3 requirements 13:8 respect 8:24 respectfully 9:23 result 7:8 reveal 11:8 review 6:21,22 11:8 11:9 reviewed 4:21 revisit 13:1 right 6:25 7:24 9:7,13 11:1 11:3,14 12:8,9 13:11,22 15:6,19 rights 12:16 Robert 2:6 4:5 Rosenfeldt 2:12 Rothstein 2:12 rule 5:25 6:3,4 6:24 8:13 8:18 9:17 9:18 11:21 13:10 14:5 14:5 ruled 7:15 Rules 5:21 6:1 11:22 ruling 8:7,22 S s 3:1 4:7 6:2 saying 9:23 says 10:7,16,16 scheduled 14:8 scrutiny 9:16 seal 4:16,19,24 5:1,21 8:13 8:14 9:12 10:3 11:11 14:6 15:6,7 sealed 4:14,15,25 8:11,15 10:12 13:4 14:9,9 15:12 sealing 9:21,21 10:13 13:2 13:19 second 7:3 13:3,7 Secondly 6:2 see 4:18 15:1,12 serious 10:22 set 11:14 shift 8:11 short 5:16 Shullman 2:17 3:12,12 3 17, 17, 19 3 2 06:4,9610 10 : 19 10:20,24,2511 4, 18 12 6, 10, 14 side 4: 4 sign 6 : 14 signed 14 : 10 similar 11 : 9 simply 9 : 4 13 : 10 Sir 4:910:6 situations :26 slow 3 :15 solution 11:16 somebody 6 :22 soon 11: 14 sort 11:10 sought 10: 8 South 2 : 3 specific 10:712:20 spelled 4: 1 standing 8:9, 10 14:2 State 1: 6, 24 3:8 4 : 2 3 8 : 12 11:24 13:3 14:3 status 12:7 Ste 2:7 Subsequent 6:24,25 suggest 4:12 12:12 suggestion 5:6 Suite 2:3,13,20 superseded 9:21 Supreme 9:16 surprises 14:20 S-H- O-L 3:18 3:19 T T 16: 1, 1 take 4:17 10:5,15 11: 11 14:20 16: 1, 7 talk 6: 6, 26 tangible 10:7 tell 4 : 10 6: 9 tells 9 : 4 ten 11:21 12:3 12 :14 16: 14 terrible 6: 17 test 8: 1. test imon y 3 : 4 thank 8:21 13: 14 June 10, 2009 14:13 15:18 15:19,20 thanks 3:25 6:15 theory 5:17 thing 12:4,6 things 5:23,23 15:2 think 4:10,12 5:3 5:6 6:7 7:22,22 8:18 9:13 9:14 10:16 11:6,20 12:19 14:19 14:20,21 thinking 4:21 8:6,8 8:22 Third 2:9,16 Thomas 2:18 3:13 time 5:20 8:13 9:11 14:9 14:19,19,21 timing 13:18 today 11:6,13 14:17 today's 15:3 to- wit 3:7 transcript 16:6 transgres... 12:23,24 traveling 9:17,18 true 16: 6 EFTA00233788

Proceedings trying 5 5:16 twelve 12:5 two 61091 12:1513:19 15:11 types 14:7 ultimately 7:25 understand 13:22 unique 12:24 unseal 4:17 6:11 10:12 11:15 unsealed 5:2 7:17 unsealing 4:8 1 vacate 10:13 vs 1:9 3:8 6:17 1:19 went 7.1 west 1:21,25 2:4 2:7 3:5 we'll 14:7 we're 9:17,19 11:6 William 2:10 3:10 wish 5:4 words 10:9 written 14:15 Yeah 12:13 14:18 year 13:9 yelling 10:18 zealous 10:17 w #100578 waiting 12 : 5 want 4:17.6:21,22 7:1,2,5,17 13:18,23 14:14 wasn't 8:15 week 13:19 weeks 12:15 13:20 weighing 1: 25 16: 11 1 1:30 15:15 10 1:18 3:6 10th 16:8 101 2:19 11:08 1:19 3:6 11:25 1400 2:3 1500 2:20 1650 2:13 2 2.303 8:17 14:4 2.420 13:10 14:6 2.420(d) 8:18 2006-C29454 1:4 2008-CF9381 1:4 2009 1:18 3:6 16:8 22nd 15:14 25th 15:15 250 2:3 3 3rd 2:19 33301-1181 2:21 33394 2:14 33401 2:4 33401-4349 2:7 400 2:7 401 2:13 4 515 2:7 June 10, 2009 EFTA00233789

IN THE CIRCUIT OCURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2.303-9/08 IN RE: SEALING OF COURT HEARINGS AND RECORDS The Florida constitution mandates that the public shall have access to court records, subject only to certain enumerated limitations which are restricted by operation of state law, federal law, or court rule. In re Amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Admin. 2.420 - Sealing of Court Records, 954 So.2d 16 (Fla. 2007). The Rules of the Supreme Court strongly disfavor court records that are hidden from public scrutiny. The Florida Supreme Court recently adopted Interim Rule 2.420 of the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration which addresses the procedures for sealing noncriminal court records. In order to ensure that both criminal and noncriminal court records are sealed properly it is NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority conferred by Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.215, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. A request to make court records or a court hearing confidential in any type of case must be made by written motion. Parties cannot submit an agreed-upon order. The Motion must be captioned "Motion to Make Court Records Confidential" or "Motion to Make Court Hearing Confidential". The Motion must identify with particularity the records or hearing to be made confidential and the grounds upon which it is based. The Motion must include a signed certification by the party making the request that the motion is being made in good faith and is supported by a sound factual and legal basis. 2. The records that are the subject of a Motion to Make Court Records Confidential will be treated as confidential pending resolution of the motion. The case number, docket number, or other identifying number of a case will remain public. Pseudonyms may be used as permitted by the court. Court records made confidential under this rule must be treated as confidential during any appellate proceeding in this Circuit. 3. A public hearing on any motion to seal a court record or court hearing will be held as soon as practicable but no less than ten (10) days prior to the notice being given to the public and the press and no later than 30 days after the filing of the motion. A party may seek to hold all or EFTA00233790

a portion of the hearing on a Motion to Make Court Records Confidential in camera if necessary to protect any of the interests listed in Interim Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420(c)(9)(A). The moving party will be responsible for ensuring that a complete record of any hearing be created either by use of a court reporter or by any recording device that is provided as a matter of right by the court. 4. A sealing order issued by a court must state with specificity the grounds for sealing and the findings of the court that justify sealing. The order granting the sealing request must contain as much detail as possible including the parties' names or pseudonyms, whether the progress docket is to be confidential, the court records that are to be confidential and the names of persons who arc permitted access. The order must contain specific findings that the degree, duration, and manner of confidentiality are no broader than necessary to protect the interests listed in Interim Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420(c)(9)(A). The order will not reveal the information that is to be made confidential. The order will direct whether the progress docket is to be sealed. 5. If an order sealing a court file is silent as to whether the progress docket is to be sealed, the clerk shall seal the court file but maintain a public docket with no alternation of the parties' names. In accordance with Interim Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420(c)(9) the Clerk shall NOT seal the case number, docket number, or any other identifying number of a case that is sealed by court order. 6. The Court will direct the Clerk to post the order sealing the court file on the Clerk's website as well as on the bulletin board located at the Main Courthouse within ten (10) days following the entry of the order and must remain posted in both locations for at least 30 days. 7. A nonparty may file a written motion to vacate a sealing order in accordance with Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420 (2007); In re Amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Admin. 2.420 - Sealing of Court Records, 954 So.2d 16 (Fla. 2007). 8. A public hearing must be held on any contested motion to vacate a sealing order. The court, in its discretion, may hold a hearing on an uncontested motion. While challenge hearings must be open to the public, a party may seek to hold a portion or all of the hearing in camera if necessary to protect the interests listed in Interim Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420(cX9)(A). The movant must ensure that a record of the hearing is made. The movant seeking to vacate an order bears the burden of showing that the order is unsound. 9. If the identity of a party is to remain confidential, all applicable pleadings will be filed with the following designation on the front of the pleading: "Confidential Party — Court Service Requested". The judicial assistant for the division in which the pleading is filed is responsible for providing such notice to the applicable parties. The judicial assistant is to provide such notice so as not to inadvertently reveal the identity of the confidential party. 2 EFTA00233791

10. This administrative rule does NOT address the confidentiality of records admitted into evidence and it does NOT pertain to the statutory process for sealing or expunging criminal history records. Motions to Seal pleadings or court records filed in a criminal case must, however, comply with this Administrative Order. This administrative order also does NOT pertain to court records that are confidential pursuant to statute, rule or other legal authority. 11. If a motion to seal is not made in good faith and is not supported by a sound legal and factual basis, the court may impose sanctions upon the movant. 12. The Clerk of Court, or a deputy clerk, is hereby authorized to open any court file sealed by operation of law or court order for the purpose of filing documents pertinent to the particular file, as well as for microfilming or imaging files, and for preparing a record on appeal. The Clerk, or deputy clerk, shall reseal the file immediately upon completion of the task, with the date and time of the unsealing clearly marked on the outside of the file along with the initials of the deputy clerk. 13. In all matters except adoption and surrogacy cases, the Clerk of Court will make the contents of a sealed file available to adult parties and their attorneys of record. The contents of adoption and surrogacy files shall not be made available to any person absent a court order. DONE AND SIGNED in Chambers in West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida this day of September, 2008. supersedes admin. order 2.032 10/06 Kathleen J. oll Chief Jud 3 EFTA00233792

IN TIIE aRcurr COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 2.032 - I0106 IN RE: SF.ALINO COURT HEARINGS AND RECORDS WHEREAS all court proceedings are public events and a strong presumption of public access attaches to all proceedings and their records; and WHEREAS records made or received pursuant to court rule, law, or ordinance, or in connection with the transaction of official business arc subject to public disclosure; and WHEREAS privacy rights of litigants may in certain circumstances require that court records or documents in the record should be sealed. NOW, THEREFORE, it is ORDERED that to balance the competing interests of litigants' privacy interests and the public's right to access to court records, the following procedures am established for scaling court records: I . When a Motion is received for the staling of a hearing or all or part or a court record, the Court will ditto a hearing be held on same. The Court will give notice of the hearing by posting same on the electronic bulletin board established by the Clerk of Court expressly for this purpose. Unless otherwise ordered with a reason given by the Court, notice should include enough disclosure to identify the case, the moven'. the respondent, and a brief, generic description of the matters sealed or sought to be sealed. 2. 'the Court will not set a hearing less than ten (10) days prior to the notice being given to the public and the press. 3. Where prior notice to the public and press regarding the scaling of a record is not practicable, the Court will address such Motion, and if granted, provide notice of any decision to seal on the Clerk's electronic bulletin board. Unless otherwise ordered with a reason given by the Court, notice should include enough disclosure to identify the case, the movant, the respondent, and a brief, generic description of the matters scaled or sought to be sealed. 4. Access to court proceedings and records may be restricted to protect the interests of litigants only after a showing that the following has been met: (i) the measure limiting or denying access, closure or sealing of records or both, is necessary to prevent a serious and imminent threat to the administration of justice; EFTA00233793

(ii) no less restrictive alternative measures are available which would mitigate the danger; and (III) the measure being considered will in fact achieve the court's protective purpose. 5. The reasons supporting sealing the file must be stated with specificity In the order sealing the court record or hearing. The Case number should tmain accessible on banner" regardless of whether the case has been scaled. DONE and ORDERED, in Chambers. at West Palm Reach. Florida this IP day of October. 2006. /S/ Judge Kathleen J. Kroll. Chief Judge • supersedes administrative order no. 2.032 •7/04 •6 'Ilie Court recognizes the present technology (as of October 10, 2006) used by the Clerk supports this, however it can not happen without a system modification which shall he completed by December 31. 2006. EFTA00233794

Westlaw. Not Reported in So.2d Not Reported in So.2d, 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.), 22 Media L. Rep. 2497 (Cite as: 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Clr.Ct.)) C Florida Circuit Court, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Volusia County. JOHN DOE-I THROUGH JOHN DOE-4 and Par- ents of John Doe-I through John Doe-4, Plaintiffs, MUSEUM OF SCIENCE AND HISTORY OF JACKSONVILLE, INC., Defendant. Nos. 92-32567-CI-CI, Div. 32. June 8, 1994. William H. Ogle, Ormond Beach, FL. W. Douglas Childs, Jacksonville, FL. Jonathan D. Kaney Jr., Daytona Beach, FL. OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO CLOSE TRIAL RICHARD B. ORFINGER, Circuit Judge. *1 THIS MATTER is before the Court on the plaintiffs' motion to exclude the public from the tri- al of this case. Notice of hearing was given to rep- resentatives of the media as required by law. News- Journal Corporation, publisher of The News- Journal, filed a response and appeared in opposi- tion to the motion. Defendant took no position. According to the complaint, a man who worked at the local museum sexually abused the minor plaintiffs. He had first come into contact with three of the minors as they served as volunteers under his supervision. More than four years ago, the abuser was prosecuted and sentenced to prison. Since then the plaintiffs have settled suits for damages result- ing from this abuse against the Daytona Beach Mu- seum of Arts and Sciences, the Volusia County School Board, and the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. As a previous employer of the abuser, plaintiffs allege this de- Page 1 fendant failed to disclose information about the ab- user's record of sexual abuse when it received an inquiry related to his employment in this com- munity. Although so many persons have become familiar with the case that defendant has listed eighty-one potential fact witnesses, no victim has yet been identified in the media. Relying on a privacy interest in the facts relating to the sexual abuse, plaintiffs argue that closure is ne- cessary to prevent the substantial harm that likely would result from revelation of these facts and identification as the victims.FNI Thus the motion calls upon the court to decide whether a privacy in- terest in the facts relating to sexual abuse suffered by the minors provides a proper basis for closure of the trial of the minors' suit for damages arising out of this abuse. For the reasons that follow, the court concludes that this is not a proper basis for closure and denies the motion. FN1. Previously, plaintiffs moved for an order restraining anyone, including the me- dia, from publishing information disclosed during the trial that would identify the minor victims. The court denied this mo- tion. See: Nebraska Press Association I Stuart, 427 U.S. 539 (1976) and The Flor- ida Star I B.J.F., 491 U.S. 524 (1989). Whenever other interests compete with the public interest in open judicial proceedings, "[D]ur analys- is must begin with the proposition that all civil and criminal court proceedings are public events, re- cords of court proceedings are public records, and there is a strong presumption in favor of public ac- cess to such matters." Sentinel Communications Co. I Watson, 615 So.2d 768, 770 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (citing Barron I Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So.2d 113 (Fla.1988)). This presumption rests on the most fundamental values of American government. O2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. EFTA00233795

Not Reported in So.2d Not Reported in So.2d, 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.), 22 Media L. Rep. 2497 (Cite as: 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.)) "[T]he people have a right to know what is done in their courts.... [T]he greatest publicity to the acts of those holding positions of public trust, and the greatest freedom in the discussion of the proceed- ings of public tribunals that is consistent with truth and decency, are regarded as essential to the public welfare." Barron, 531 So.2d at 116-7 (citing In re Shortridge, 34 P. 227, 228-29 (Cal.1893) ). Open- ness in courts has a salutary effect on the propensity of witnesses to tell the truth and of judi- cial officers to perform their duties conscientiously. It informs persons affected by litigation of its effect upon them and fosters "respect for the law[,] intelli- gent acquaintance ... with the methods of govern- ment', and] a strong confidence in judicial remedies ... which could never be inspired by a system of secrecy...." Id., (citing 6 WIGMORE, EVIDENCE § 1834 (Chadboum rev.1976) ). These fundamental values come into play whenever the court is in ses- sion; and the presumption of openness applies in hard cases as well as easy cases. "The reason for openness is basic to our form of government." Id *2 This motion is opposed by various news organ- izations, but the presumption of openness is of lar- ger importance than the immediate interest of the press in the case of the moment. To be sure, the press has a cognizable interest in maintaining open courts "because its ability to gather news is directly impaired or curtailed" by restrictions on access. Moreover, the press is assigned a fiduciary role in enforcing public rights of access because the press "may be properly considered as a representative of the public (for) enforcement of public right of ac- cess." Nevertheless, the values of openness in courts transcend the interests of the press because "Mreedom of the press is not, and has never been a private property right granted to those who own the news media. It is a cherished and almost sacred right of each citizen to be informed about current events on a timely basis so each can exercise his discretion in determining the destiny and security of himself, other people, and the Nation." State ex re. Miami Herald Pub. Co. I. McIntosh, 340 So.2d 904, 908 (Fla.1977). In serving the right of each cit- Page 2 izen to be informed, judicial openness, of which the press is an instrument, sustains public confidence in the judiciary and thus serves the ultimate value of popular sovereignty. This higher purpose of openness is not always ap- parent in the public scrutiny of the daily business of the courts. Depending on the definition of news- worthiness, it may be possible to dismiss as un- worthy much that transpires in civil courts. Here, it is easy to ask what public interest is served by sub- jecting these minor victims to the risk of public identification. However, Barron teaches that this is the wrong question because it overlooks the higher purpose of openness in the courts. In Barron, a case involving privacy concerns inher- ent in a divorce case, the court strongly reaffirmed the presumption that Florida civil courts are open. In dissent, Justice McDonald saw the question in case-specific terms. He would have closed the pro- ceeding because "the rights of the public to inform- ation contained in a domestic relations lawsuit is minimal, if existent at all." 531 So.2d at 121. Impli- citly, this approach would have required the pro- ponent of openness to show a particular need to know facts of the specific case in order to gain ac- cess. The majority rejected this approach because it saw the conflicting interests in broader terms. "The parties seeking a dissolution of their marriage are not entitled to a private court proceeding just be- cause they are required to utilize the judicial sys- tem." 531 So.2d at 119. A closure request implicates the integrity and cred- ibility of the judicial system itself and not just the immediate concerns of the parties. The balance to be struck is not between the people's need to know the particular facts of the case versus the parties' need to keep these facts private but between the public interest in open courts versus the personal desire for a private forum. "Public trials are essen- tial to the judicial system's credibility in a free soci- ety." Barron at 116. *3 Although the Florida Supreme Court holds that O 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. EFTA00233796

Not Reported in So.2d Not Reported in So.2d, 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.), 22 Media L. Rep. 2497 (Cite as: 1994 WI.. 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.)) "the public and the press have a fundamental right of access to all judicial proceedings," however, this right is not absolute. State ex rel. Miami Herald Pub. Co. McIntosh, 340 So.2d at 908-9. In Bar- ron, the court took the occasion to establish the standards upon which the presumption of openness may be overcome when necessary "to protect corn- pcting interests." The court wrote a "definitive statement ... to assist judicial officers in this sensit- ive area." 531 So.2d at 117-8. Barron establishes a strong presumption of open- ness for all court proceedings and records, places the burden on the proponent of closure, and grants standing to the public and media to challenge clos- ure orders. Before a court may enter any order of closure it must determine there are no reasonable alternatives to closure and must order the least re- strictive closure necessary to accomplish the pur- pose of closure. 531 So.2d at 118-9. A closure or- der should be "drawn with particularity and nar- rowly applied." 531 So.2d at 117. Barron specifies an exclusive listing of those com- peting interests that may under appropriate circum- stances be sufficiently weighty to justify closure. Closure may be ordered "only when necessary" to serve one of six competing interests: (a) to comply with established public policy set forth in the constitution, statutes, rules, or case law; (b) to protect trade secrets; (c) to protect a compelling governmental interest [e.g., national security; confidential informants]; (d) to obtain evidence to properly determine legal issues in a case; (e) to avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties [e.g., to protect young witnesses from of- fensive testimony; to protect children in a di- vorce]; or (I) to avoid substantial injury to a party by disclos- Page 3 ure of matters protected by a common law or pri- vacy right not generally inherent in the specific type of civil proceeding sought to be closed.... At the outset, the proponent of closure must identi- fy one or more of such interests that is implicated in the proposcd closure. Here it is not necessary to go beyond this first level of analysis because plaintiffs have not connected their motion to a valid interest that would justify closure. This motion poses a direct confrontation between the individual interest in privacy and the public in- terest in open courts. Because there is inherent in the case sensitive, intimate, and embarrassing private facts, plaintiffs seek to litigate their claim in a closed proceeding. They argue "[ghat revelation of [the identities of the minor plaintiffs) has the po- tential to inflict substantial harm upon them [as] a matter of common sense." There is no question there are strong reasons to keep private the facts surrounding the abuse prac- ticed on the minors by the now-imprisoned abuser. The question this court must decide, however, is whether these are reasons to secure the courtroom. The question is not whether to afford privacy to the plaintiffs but whether to afford plaintiffs a closed forum in which to disclose these facts. •4 Although there is no case directly on this point, the present question comes fully within the holding of Barron, which thoroughly considered the com- petition between the people's interest in public courts and the personal interest in private facts. In effect, Barron raised the question of the role to be assigned to privacy in a system of public courts, and the majority resolved the issue by granting a narrow role to privacy based on considerations re- lating to the legitimate expectations of privacy. In the Florida Supreme Court's well-developed pri- vacy jurisprudence, the fundamental basis of the right of privacy is a legitimate expectation of pri- vacy. Not every fact in every circumstance is private, and not every act of government violates C 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. EFTA00233797

Not Reported in So.2d Not Reported in So.2d, 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.), 22 Media L. Rep. 2497 (Cite as: 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.C1r.Ct.)) the right to be let alone. The concept by which the court separates the appropriate from the inappropri- ate instance for invoking the privacy right is this expectation. Stall I State. 570 So.2d 257, 261 (Fla.1990). In order to establish a right of privacy, the individual must establish that "a reasonable ex- pectation of privacy ... exist[s]." Winfield I Divi- sion of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 477 So.2d 544, 547 (Fla.1985). A right of privacy cannot attach when there is no expectation of privacy. Under our historic tradition of public courts, what reasonable expectation of privacy could a litigant possibly entertain? Concur- ring in Barron, Justice Erhlich would have con- ceded the litigant no reasonable expectation of pri- vacy. He pointed out, "we have ... recognized that It]he potential for invasion of privacy is inherent in the litigation process.' Rasmussen I South Flor- ida Blood Service, 500 So.2d 533, 535 (Fla.1987). While civil litigants may have a legitimate expecta- tion of privacy in pretrial depositions and interrog- atories which are not filed with the court (citations omitted), no such expectation exists in connection with civil proceedings and court files which histor- ically have been open to the public. See Forsberg I Housing Authority, 455 So.2d 373, 375 (Fla.1984) (Overton, J., concurring) (there is traditionally no expectation of privacy in court files)." 531 So.2d at 120. Justice Erhlich shows the conflict between pri- vacy and publicness. If the privacy interest were al- lowed unbounded scope, it would overcome the public nature of trials. Thus a system of public tri- als must insist that litigants abandon qualms about disclosure of private facts when they place them in contest in the court. Without rejecting this view entirely, the majority nevertheless identified a limited scope of privacy within civil litigation. "We find that, under appro- priate circumstances, the constitutional right of pri- vacy established in Florida by the adoption of art- icle I, section 23, could form a constitutional basis for closure under (e) or (f)." 531 So.2d at 118. The majority thus conceived of two instances in which a Page 4 reasonable expectation of privacy might be found. •5 First, there is the privacy expectation of persons who are not parties to the case. Involuntary parti- cipants may have a reasonable claim of privacy. Thus under item (g), Barron recognizes that closure may be justified if the proponent carries the heavy burden of showing closure is necessary "to avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties [e.g., to protect young witnesses from offensive testimony; to protect children in a divorce]." 531 So.2d at 118. Second, there is the more limited privacy expecta- tion of a party. Again, the doctrine of legitimate ex- pectation is applicable. Although a litigant has no right to expect privacy in matters involved in the case litigated in a public court, there may be mat- ters extrinsic to the case with respect to which a lit- igant has a reasonable privacy claim. Under Bar- ron's item (f), a proponent may be entitled to clos- ure if he or she carries the burden of showing that closure is necessary "to avoid substantial injury to a party by disclosure of matters protected by a com- mon law or privacy right not generally inherent in the specific type of civil proceeding sought to be closed." 531 So.2d at 118. Barron rules out closure based on privacy interests of parties in the subject matter of the case itself. In recognizing a peripheral role for the privacy claims of civil litigants, the majority held there can be no privacy interest in that which is inherent in the case. Because litigation in a public court system in- volves an inherent tendency to invade privacy, a lit- igant has no reasonable expectation of privacy in the subject matter of a case. This must be so if, as Barron soundly affirms, there is to be a system of open courts in Florida. Applying this standard in Barron, the court determ- ined the medical history in question should not be scaled because it was inherent in the case. "Although generally protected by one's privacy right, medical reports and history arc no longer pro- tected when the medical condition becomes an in- tegral part of the civil proceeding, particularly O 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. EFTA00233798

Not Reported in So.2d Not Reported in So.2d, 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.O.), 22 Media L. Rcp. 2497 (Cite as: 1994 WI., 741009 (Fla.C1r.Cr.)) when the condition is asserted as an issue by the party seeking closure.... [Mjedical information is an inherent part of these proceedings and cannot be utilized as a proper basis for closure." 531 So.2d at 119. The same is true in this case. Those private facts which form the basis of the motion for closure are the facts inherent in the plaintiffs' case. Neverthe- less, plaintiffs argue their request implicates the competing interests Barron listed in item (a) deal- ing with public policy, item (e), dealing with pri- vacy of third party, and item (f), dealing with pri- vacy of a party. Plaintiffs first argue that closure of the trial is ne- cessary under item (a) "to comply with established public policy set forth in the constitution, statutes, rules, or case law." 531 So.2d at 118. Plaintiffs rightly contend "[Ihe State of Florida has long re- cognized, as a matter of public policy, the need to protect minors who come into contact with the justice systcm," and cite statutory provisions ex- empting records of sex crimes and child abuse from public records disclosure and providing for closure of adoption and dependency proceedings. See Fla.Stat. §§ 119.07(h); 63.162; 39.408(c). *6 To be sure, it is public policy to protect minor victims of sex crimes from unnecessary public ex- posure. The cited exceptions to public records laws illustrate this as does the practice of anonymous pleading. However, state policy neither requires nor permits closure of public trials on the basis of the privacy interests of minor victims of sex crimes. The trial of the perpetrator of a sex crime against a minor must be conducted in public as a matter of Florida com- mon law.FN2 Under Fla.Stat. § 918.16, the court has a certain ability to clear the courtroom during testimony of a person under the age of 16 but the press specifically may not be excluded .R43 A re- cent statute protecting minor witnesses does not purport to authorize closure of the trial to protect minor witnesses.FN4 When the state prosecutes the Page 5 parent of a minor child for sexual abuses practiced on the child, the trial is not closed nor is there sup- pression of the identity of the parent from which, as plaintiffs argue here, the identity of the child is readily inferred.FN5 Indeed, from the reports of tort suits by minor victims of sexual crimes seeking damages from the perpetrator or those vicariously liable, it can be seen that the courts of this state conduct cases like the present as open public trials in the name of the party. F142. Bundy'. State, 455 So.2d 330 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1109 (1986). Miami Herald Publishing Co.'. Lewis, 426 So.2d 1 (Fla.1982). See also Globe Newspaper Company Superior Court, 102 S.Ct. 2613 (1982) (Same under First Amendment). F/43. See Palm Beach Newspapers'. Nourse, 413 So.2d 467 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (Error to summarily exclude press from arraignment of defendant charge with lewd and lascivious act on child under age 14); News-Press Pub. I. Shearer, 5 Med.L.Rptr. 1272 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) (Error to exclude press from courtroom while juvenile witness in sex crime testi- fies and error to seal record from press). Compare Miami Herald Pub. Co. Morphonios, 467 So.2d 1026 (Fla.1985) (Error to gag press from publishing testi- mony of minor witness via prerecorded video) and Thornton'. State, 585 So.2d 1189 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (Statute cannot override defendant's Sixth Amendment right to public trial without case-by-case balancing test). See also Doe'. Doe, 567 So.2d 1002 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (Affirming denial of motion to close pro- ceedings in which mother seeks authority for surgical sterilization of mentally handi- capped daughter). F144. Fla.Stat. § 92.55 (Authorizing the court to permit or prohibit "the attendance O 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. EFTA00233799

Not Reported in So.2d Not Reported in So.2d, 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.), 22 Media L. Rep. 2497 (Cite as: 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.C1r.Ct.)) of any person at the proceeding") (emphasis supplied). FNS. See, e.g., Schmidt J State, 590 So.2d 404 (Fla.1991) (Father prosecuted for crime of video recording of minor daughter in violation of statute concerning depiction of sex acts); Sanders State, 568 So.2d 1014 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (Father prosec- uted for lewd and lascivious acts against minor daughter). FN6. See, e.g., Zordan I Page, 500 So.2d 608 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (Suit by minor and parents against carrier for damages in- curred when insured fondled private parts of minor plaintiff); Hennagan I Depart- ment of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 467 So.2d 748 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (suit by minor and parents against FHP for damages when minor driver was allegedly sexually abused by patrolmen after being stopped on pretext of suspi- cion); Drake 1 Island Community Church, Inc., 462 So.2d 1142 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (Suit by minor and parents for damages from sexual abuse by teacher on minor pu- pil). Compare Freehauf I School Board of Seminole County, 623 So.2d 761 (Fla. 5th DCA)cause dismissed, 629 So.2d 132 (Fla.1994) (Suit for abuse inflicted on son by stepmother; failure to retort suspected abuse by school); Fischer 1 Metcalf 543 So.2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (Suit by minors against psychologist for damages from abusive father when suspicion of ab- use was not reported). The court concludes that it is not necessary to close this trial in order to comply with any public policy of the State of Florida. The plaintiffs next argue that closure is necessary to serve the interest of innocent third parties whose privacy warrants closure under item (e) of Barron. The plaintiffs assert that each minor in this consol- Page 6 idated cause is a third party as to the other three ac- tions and thus the trial should be closed to protect them as third parties in the consolidated cases. Hav- ing voluntarily joined to bring the action, they can- not claim to be third parties to the action nor assert a legitimate expectation of privacy in the disclos- ures that necessarily follow from their decision to act in concert. Plaintiffs also assert the privacy interest of other minors who were victims of this same abuse but who have not joined in this suit. There is no evid- ence that trial of this case would implicate these third parties. In any event, plaintiffs lack standing to assert the interest of these third parties, and the Court will not decide any issue affecting their rights unless a party with standing raises the issue. Finally, plaintiffs attempt to bring their motion un- der item (f) relating to the privacy interest of a party. To be entitled to an order of closure under this item, however, plaintiffs must show that clos- ure is necessary "to avoid substantial injury to a party by disclosure of matters protected by a com- mon law or privacy right not generally inherent in the specific type of civil proceeding sought to be closed." 531 So.2d at 119.(emphasis added). Plaintiffs argue their identities are not inherent facts in the case and thus the trial should be closed to prevent revelation of the identity. However, plaintiffs also contend it will be impossible to try the case without revelation of their names. Their ar- gument refutes itself. The identity of a party is in- herent in the case, and that conccm alone could not justify total closure. This argument is a proxy for the ineffective argument that the sensitive nature of inherent private facts should justify a private forum. Facts regarding abuse form the core of their case, and thus it "is an inherent part of these proceedings and cannot be utilized as a proper basis for clos- ure." 531 So.2d at 119. The decision to litigate this issue is tantamount to a decision to place the in- formation before the public. *7 As sympathetic as their claim is, it fails to state a cognizable reason for closure under the law. The 2009 Thomson Rcuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. EFTA00233800

Not Reported in So.2d Not Reported in So.2d, 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.), 22 Media L. Rep. 2497 (Cite as: 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.)) request to close a civil trial because of a party's dis- closural concerns with facts inherent in the cause cannot be reconciled with Barron. Facts generally protected by a party's privacy right are no longer protected from disclosure when they become an in- tegral part of a civil proceeding. Indeed, plaintiffs' argument for a private forum could be asserted as the basis for a wide array of exceptions that would swallow up the presumption of openness. "The ... argument based on this interest therefore proves too much. (T)hat same interest could be relied upon to support an array of mandatory closure rules ... proves too much, and runs contrary to the very foundation of the right of access...." Globe Newspa- per Company Superior Court, 102 S.Ct. 2613, 2622 (1982). Accordingly, having considered the briefs and argu- ments of counsel for the reasons set forth in this opinion, it is ORDERED that the Motion to Close Trial be denied. DONE AND ORDERED. Fla.Cir.Ct.,1 994. John Doc-1 Through John Doe-4 I Museum of Sci- ence and History of Jacksonville, Inc. Not Reported in So.2d, 1994 WL 741009 (Fla.Cir.Ct.), 22 Media L. Rep. 2497 END OF DOCUMENT Page 7 O 2009 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. EFTA00233801

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON IN RE: JANE DOE, Petitioner. FILED by JUL 0 9 2008 STEVEN N. LAMMORE CLERK U.S MST. CS s.o. or nA.-wra. GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE TO VICTIM'S EMERGENCY PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF CRIME VICTIM RIGHTS ACT, 18 U.S.C. 6 3771 The United States of America, by and through its undersigned counsel, files its Response to Victim's Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Victim Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771, and states: I. THERE IS NO "COURT PROCEEDING" UNDER 18 U.S.C. & 377I (b) Petitioner complains that she has been denied her rights under the Crime Victims Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771. In the emergency petition filed by the victim, she alleges the Government has denied her rights since she has received no consultation with the attorney for the government regarding possible disposition of the charges (18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(5)); no notice of any public court proceedings (18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(2)); no information regarding her right to restitution (18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(6)); and no notice of rights under the Crime Victim Rights Act (CVRA). Emergency Petition, I 5. The instant case is unique in several respects. First, in 2006, Jeffrey Epstein was charged with felony solicitation of prostitution in the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County, Florida. This charge was based upon the offenses alleged in paragraph 1 of the petition. Second, while Epstein has been under federal investigation, he has not been charged in EFTA00233802

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 2 of 8 the Southern District of Florida. Title 18, U.S.C., Section 3771(b)(1) provides in pertinent part that. "Din any court proceeding involving an offense against a crime victim, the court shall ensure that the crime victim is afforded the rights described in subsection (a)." There is no "court proceeding" in the instant case since Epstein has not been charged with violation of any federal statute. No federal grand jury indictment has been returned, nor has any criminal information been filed. There can thus be no failure of a right to notice of a public court proceeding or the right to restitution. In her memorandum, petitioner relics upon In Re Dean, 527 F.3d 391 (5th Cir. 2008), where the Fifth Circuit held that the CVRA required the government to "confer in some reasonable way with the victims before ultimately exercising its broad discretion." Id. at 395. In Dean, the government sought and obtained an ex pane order permitting it to negotiate a plea agreement with BP Products North America, without first consulting with the victims, individuals injured and survivors of those killed in a refinery explosion. A plea agreement was ultimately negotiated and the victims objected. The appellate court found that the CVRA granted a right to confer. However, the court declined to grant mandamus relief for prudential reasons, finding that the district court had the benefit of the views of the victims who chose to participate at the hearing held on whether the plea agreement should be accepted. Ida at 396. Dean is legally distinguishable in several respects. For one thing, the court's discussion of the scope of the right to confer was unnecessary because the court ultimately declined to issue mandamus relief. Dean, 527 F.3d at 395. Also, in offering its view that this right applies pre- charge, it is noteworthy that the court, in purporting to quote the statute, omitted the last three words of section 3771(aX5)("in the case"), words that arguably point in the opposite direction by - 2 - EFTA00233803

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 3 of 8 %se suggesting that the right applies post-charge. Further, the court went to great lengths to emphasize that its holding was limited to the particular circumstances presented in that case (i.e., the simultaneous filing of a plea agreement and formal charges), which of course, is not the case here. No federal charges have been filed in the instant case, and this case, unlike Dean, involves an agreement to defer federal prosecution in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida and not a guilty plea. at 394. Finally, the Dean court expressly declined to "speculate on the (right to confer's) applicability to other situations." a Nothing in § 3771(a)(5) supports the petitioner's claim that she had a right to be consulted before the Government could enter into a non- prosecution agreement which defers federal prosecution in exchange for state court resolution of criminal liability, and a significant concession on an element of a claim for compensation under 18 U.S.C. § 2255. II. THE GOVERNMENT HAS USED ITS BEST EFFORTS TO COMPLY WITH 18 U.S.C. 6 3771(a) The Epstein case was investigated initially by the Palm Beach Police Department in 2006. Exhibit A, Declaration of Assistant United States Attorney ¶ 2. Subsequently, the Palm Beach Police Department sought the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Throughout the investigation, when a victim was identified, victim notification letters were provided to the victim by both the FBI Victim-Witness Specialist and AUSA a¶ 3. Petitioner's counsel, Brad Edwards, Esq., currently represents C.W., T.M., and S.R. The U.S. Attorney's Office victim notification letter to C.W. was provided by the 1:131. and the letter to T.M. was hand-delivered by AUSA UMto her when she was interviewed in April 2007. FBI victim notification letters were mailed to C.W. and .r.m. on - 3 - EFTA00233804

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 4 of 8 %et Niast January 10, 2008, and to S.R. on May 30, 2008. Villafafla Decl., ¶ 3. Throughout the investigation, AUSAInauld the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist had contact with C.W. ¶ 4. Earlier in the investigation, T.M. was represented by James Eisenberg, E:sq. Consequently, all contact with T.M. was made through Mr. Eisenberg. In mid-2007, Epstein's attorneys approached the U.S. Attorney's Office in an effort to resolve the federal investigation. a,j 5. At that time, Mr. Epstein had been charged by the State of Florida with solicitation of prostitution, in violation of Florida Statutes § 796.07. Mr. Epstein's attorneys sought a global resolution of this matter. The United States subsequently agreed to defer federal prosecution in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, so long as certain basic preconditions were met. One of the key objectives for the Government was to preserve a federal remedy for the young girls whom Epstein had sexually exploited. Thus, one condition of that agreement, notice of which was provided to the victims on July 9, 2008, is the following: "Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." The Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance (May 2005), Article - 4 - EFTA00233805

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 5 of 8 IV, Services to Victims and Witnesses, provides the following guidance for proposed plea agreements: (3) Proposed Plea Agreements. Responsible officials should make reasonable efforts to notify identified victims of, and consider victims' views about, prospective plea negotiations. In determining what is reasonable, the responsible official should consider factors relevant to the wisdom and practicality of giving notice and considering views in the context of the particular case, including, but not limited to, the following factors: (a) The impact on public safety and risks to personal safety. (b) The number of victims. (c) Whether time is of the essence in negotiating or entering a proposed plea. (d) Whether the proposed plea involves confidential information or conditions. (e) Whether there is another need for confidentiality. (f) Whether the victim is a possible witness in the cast and the effect that relaying any information may have on the defendant's right to a fair trial. Throughout negotiations, Epstein's attorneys claimed that one reason victims came forward and pressed their claims was their desire for money. They argued that victims might have an inducement to fabricate or enhance their testimony, in order to maximize their opportunities to obtain financial recompense. ci., ¶ 8. The Government was extremely concerned that disclosure of the proposed terms would compromise the investigation by providing Epstein the means of impeaching the victim witnesses, should the parties fail to reach an agreement. In light of the fact (i) that the United States agreed to defer prosecution to a previously filed state criminal case; (ii) that as a result sentencing would take place in state court before a state judge; (iii) that if the state resolution failed to meet minimum standards such that a federal prosecution was warranted, the victims would be witnesses and thus potential - 5 - EFTA00233806

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07115/2008 Page 6 of 8 %sr •••••• impeachment issues were of concern; and (iv) the United States was already making efforts to secure for victims the right to proceed federally under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 even if prosecution took place in state court, the Government determined that its actions in proceeding with this agreement best balanced the dual position of the Jane Does as both victims and potential witnesses in a criminal proceeding. On Friday, June 27, 2008, at approximately 4:15 p.m., AUSA keceived a copy of the proposed state plea agreement, and learned that Epstein's state plea hearing was scheduled for Monday, June 30, 2008, at 8:30 a.m.-eel„ 1 10. AUSA Villafafia and the Palm Beach Police Department attempted to provide notification to victims in the short time that they had. jj Although all known victims were not notified, AUSila did call attorney Edwards to provide notice to his clients regarding the hearing. AUSA Maid this, even though she had no obligation to provide notice of a state court hearing. Mr. Edwards advised that he could not attend but that someone would be present at the hearing. 1,04 the Government has complied with 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1) by using its best efforts to '•see that crime victims are notified of, and accorded, the rights described in subsection (a)." Specifically, petitioner was afforded the reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government under 18 U.S.C. §3771(a)(5). Disclosure of the specific terms of the negotiation were not disclosed prior to a final agreement being reached because the Government believed doing so would jeopardize and prejudice the prosecution in the event an agreement could not be made. Further, although 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(2) does not apply to state court proceedings, the government nonetheless notified petitioner's counsel on June 27, 2008, of the plea hearing in state court on June 30, 2008. - 6 - EFTA00233807

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 7 of 8 Section 3771(d)(6) provides, in relevant part, that "(n)othing in this chapter shall be construed to impair the prosecutorial discretion of the Attorney General or any officer under his direction." The Government exercised its judgment and discretion in determining that there was a need for confidentiality in the negotiations with Epstein. The significant benefit of obtaining Epstein's concession that victims suing him under 18 U.S.C. § 2255(a) were "victims" of the enumerated offenses, despite the fact he has not been convicted in federal court, was of sufficient importance to justify confidentiality of the negotiations. III. THE GOVERNMENT'S DISCUSSIONS WITH T.M., C.W.. AND S.R. Attorney Brad Edwards has advised the Govemment that he represents T.M., C.W., and S.R. Victim letters were provided to all three individuals. The letters to C.W. and T.M. were forwarded on January 10, 2008. ed., ¶ 3. On May 28, 2008, S.R.'s status as a victim was confirmed when she was interviewed by federal agents. a The FBI Victim Witness specialist sent her a letter on May 30, 2008. a When the agreement was signed in September 2007, T.M. was openly hostile to a prosecution of Epstein, and S.R. had refused to speak with federal investigators. Id., ¶ 7. While individual victims were not consulted regarding the agreement, none of Mr. Edwards' clients had expressed a desire to be consulted prior to the resolution of the federal investigation. 1. In October 2007, C.W. was not represented by counsel. Id., ¶ 8. She was given telephonic notice of the agreement, as were three other victims. a These four individuals were also given notice of an expected change of plea, in state court, in October 2007. In mid-June 2008, Mr. Edwards contacted AUSA =to advise that he represented C.W. and S.R., and requested a meeting. ¶ 9. AUSA asked Mr. Edwards to send - 7 - EFTA00233808

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 13 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 8 of 8 to her any information that he wished her to consider. Nothing was provided. a AUSA also told Mr. Edwards he could contact the State Attorney's Office, if he wished. To her knowledge, Mr. Edwards did not make the contact. The Government has acted reasonably in keeping T.M, C.W., and S.R. informed. Petitioner's rights under the CVRA have not been violated. Therefore, her emergency petition should be denied. Respectfully submitted, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA By: Assistant U.S. Attorney UNITED STATES KITORNEY Attorney for Respondent CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent via facsimile transmission and U.S. Mail, this( day of July, 2008, to: Brad Edwards, Esq., The Law Offices of Brad Edwards & Associates, LLC, Assistant U.S. Attorney - 8 - EFTA00233809

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson IN RE: JANE DOE, Petitioner. FILED by rte D.C. JUL 0 91008 STEVEN M. lAR0AOSE CLERK U.S. 0IST CT S.D. OF FLA. - W..N W. DECLARATION OF Al IN SUPPORT OF UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO VICTIM'S EMERGENCY PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF CRIME VICTIM RIGHTS ACT. 18 U.S.C. & 3771 I, , do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. I graduated from the University of California at Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall) in 1993. After serving as a judicial clerk to the Hon. David F. Levi in Sacramento, California, I was admitted to practice in California in 1995. I also am admitted to practice in all courts of the states of Minnesota and Florida, the Eighth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of Florida, the District of Minnesota, and the Northern District of California. My bar admission status in California and Minnesota is currently inactive. I am currently employed as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida and was so employed during all of the events described herein. EFTA00233810

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 2 of 21 2. I am the Assistant United States Attorney assigned to the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. The case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"). The federal investigation was initiated in 2006 at the request of the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD") into allegations that Jeffrey Epstein and his personal assistants had used facilities of interstate commerce to induce young girls between the ages of thirteen and seventeen to engage in prostitution, amongst other offenses. 3. Throughout the investigation, when a victim was identified, victim notification letters were provided to her both from your Affiant and from the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist. Attached hereto are copies of the letters provided to Bradley Edwards' three clients, T.M., C.W., and S.R.' Your Affiant's letter to C.W. was provided by the FBI. (IN. I ). Your Affiant's letter to T.M. was hand-delivered by myself to T.M. at the time that she was interviewed (Ex. 2).2 Both C.W. and T.M. also received letters from the FBI's Victim- Witness Specialist, which were sent on January 10, 2008 (Exs. 3 & 4). S.R. was identified via the FBI's investigation in 2007, but she initially refused to speak with investigators. S.R.'s status as a victim of a federal offense was confirmed when she was interviewed by 'Attorney Edwards filed his Motion on behalf of "Jane Doe," without identifying which of his clients is the purported victim. Accordingly, I will address facts related to C.W., T.M., and S.R. All three of those clients were victims of Jeffrey Epstein's while they were minors beginning when they were fifteen years old. 'Please note that the dates on the U.S. Attorney's Office letters to C.W. and T.M. are not the dates that the letters were actually delivered. Letters to all known victims were prepared early in the investigation and delivered as each victim was contacted. -2- EFTA00233811

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 3 of 21 federal agents on May 28, 2008. The FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist sent a letter to S.R. on May 30, 2008 (Ex. 5). 4. Throughout the investigation, the FBI agents, the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist, and your A ffiant had contact with C.W. and S.R. Attorney Edwards' other client, 'f.M., was represented by counsel and, accordingly, all contact with T.M. was made through that attorney. That attorney was James Eisenberg, and his fees were paid by Jeffrey Epstein, the target of the investigation.' 5. In the summer of 2007, Mr. Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("the Office") entered into negotiations to resolve the investigation. At that time, Mr. Epstein had been charged by the State of Florida with solicitation of prostitution, in violation of Florida Statutes § 796.07. Mr. Epstein's attorneys sought a global resolution of the matter. The United States subsequently agreed to defer federal prosecution in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, so long as certain basic preconditions were met. One of the key objectives for the Government was to preserve a federal remedy for the young girls whom Epstein had sexually exploited. Thus, one condition of that agreement, notice of which was provided to the victims on July 9, 2008, is the following: "Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein 'The undersigned does not know when Mr. Edwards began representing T.M. or whether T.M. ever formally terminated Mr. Eisenberg's representation. -3- EFTA00233812

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 4 of 21 had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." 6. An agreement was reached in September 2007. The Agreement contained an express confidentiality provision. 7. Although individual victims were not consulted regarding the agreement, several had expressed concerns regarding the exposure of their identities at trial and they desired a prompt resolution of the matter. At the time the agreement was signed in September 2007, T.M. was openly hostile to the prosecution of Epstein. The FBI attempted to interview S.R. in October 2007, at which time she refused to provide any information regarding Jeffrey Epstein. None of Attorney Edwards' clients had expressed a desire to be consulted prior to the resolution of the federal investigation. 8. As explained above, one of the terms of the agreement deferring prosecution to the State of Florida was securing a federal remedy for the victims. In October 2007, shortly after the agreement was signed, four victims were contacted and these provisions were discussed. One of those victims was C.W. who at the time was not represented, and she was given notice of the agreement. Notice was also provided of an expected change of plea in October 2007. When Epstein's attorneys learned that some of the victims had been -4- EFTA00233813

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 5 of 21 notified, they complained that the victims were receiving an incentive to overstate their involvement with Mr. Epstein in order to increase their damages claims. While your Affiant knew that the victims' statements had been taken and corroborated with independent evidence well before they were informed of the potential for damages, the agents and I concluded that informing additional victims could compromise the witnesses' credibility at trial if Epstein reneged on the agreement. 9. After C.W. had been notified of the terms of the agreement, but before Epstein performed his obligations, C.W. contacted the FBI because Epstein's counsel was attempting to take her deposition and private investigators were harassing her. Your Affiant secured pro bono counsel to represent C.W. and several other identified victims. Pro bono counsel was able to assist C.W. in avoiding the improper deposition. That pro bono counsel did not express to your Affiant that C.W. was dissatisfied with the resolution of the matter. 10. In mid-June 2008, Attorney Edwards contacted your A ffiant to inform me that he represented C.W. and S.R. and asked to meet to provide me with information regarding Epstein. I invited Attorney Edwards to send to me any information that he wanted me to consider. Nothing was provided. I also advised Attorney Edwards that he should consider contacting the State Attorney's Office, if he so wished. I understand that no contact with that office was made. Attorney Edwards had alluded to T.M., so I advised him that, to my knowledge, T.M. was still represented by Attorney James Eisenberg. -5- EFTA00233814

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 6 of 21 11. On Friday, June 27, 2008, at approximate 4:15 p.m., your Affiant received a copy of the proposed state plea agreement and learned that the plea was scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Monday, June 30, 2008. Your Affiant and the Palm Beach Police Department attempted to provide notification to victims in the short time that Epstein's counsel had given us. Although all known victims were not notified, your Affiant specifically called attorney Edwards to provide notice to his clients regarding the hearing. Your Affiant believes that it was during this conversation that Attorney Edwards notified me that he represented T.M., and I assumed that he would pass on the notice to her, as well. Attorney Edwards informed your Affiant that he could not attend but that someone would be present at the hearing. Your Affiant attended the hearing, but none of Attorney Edwards' clients was present. 12. On today's date, your Affiant provided the attached victim notifications to C.W. and S.R. via their attorney, Bradley Edwards (Exs. 6 & 7). A notification was not provided to T.M. because the U.S. Attorney's modification limited Epstein's liability to victims whom the United States was prepared to name in an indictment. In light of T.M.'s prior statements to law enforcement, your Affiant could not in good faith include T.M. as a victim in an indictment and, accordingly, could not include her in the list provided to Epstein's counsel. 13. Furthermore, with respect to the Certification of Emergency, Attorney Edwards did not ever contact me prior to the filing of that Certification to demand the relief that he requests in his Emergency Petition. On the afternoon of July 7, 2008, after your Affiant had -6- EFTA00233815

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 7 of 21 'Nee already received the Certification of Emergency and Emergency Petition, I received a letter from Attorney Edwards that had been sent, via Certified Mail, on July 3, 2008. While that letter urges the Attorney General and the United States Attorney to consider "vigorous enforcement" of federal laws with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, it contains no demand for the relief requested in the Emergency Petition. 14. I declare under penalty of perjury, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746 that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Executed this CM day of July, 2008. -7- EFTA00233816

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/20 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida SOO South Australian Ave . Suite 400 West Palm Death. FL 3.3401 ($61)8204711 Focsimile• 061) 820-8777 June 7, 2007 DELIVERY3Y HAND Miss Olie Re: Crime Victims' and Witnesses' Righls Dear Miss We Pursuant to the Justice for All Act of 2004, as a victim and/or witness of a federal offense, you have a number of rights. Those rights arc: (I) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused. (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused. (3) The right not to be excluded from any public court proceeding, unless the court determines that your testimony may be materially altered if you are present for other portions of a proceeding. (4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, or sentencing. (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case. (6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law. (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay. (8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy. tt Members of tie U.S. Department of Justice and other federal investigative agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, must use their best efforts to make sure that these rights arc protected. If you have any concerns in this regard, please feel free to contact me or Special Agentj fronrthe Federal Bureau of Investigation You also can contact the Justice Department's Office for Victims of Crime in Washington, D.C. That Office has a website at www.ovc.gov. You can seek the advice of an attorney with respect to the rights listed above and, if you believe that the rights set forth above are being violated, you have the right to petition the Court for relief. EFTA00233817

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 9 of 21 Miss Cleillaa JtagE 7, 2007 PAGE 2 In addition to these rights, you are entitled to counseling and medical services, and protection from intimidation and harassment. If the Court determines that you arc a victim, you also may be entitled to restitution from the perpetrator. A list of counseling and medical service providers can be provided to you, if you so desire. If you or your family is subjected to any intimidation or harassment, please contact Special Agent myself immediately. It is possible that someone working on behalf of the targets of the investigation may contact you. Such contact does not violaltithe lave..., However, if you arc contacted, you have the choice of speaking to that person or refusing tedo So: If ou refuse and feel that you are being threatened or harassed, then please contact Special Agent or myself. You also arc entitled to notification of upcoming case events. At this time, your case is under investigation; If anyone is charged in connection with the investigation, you will be notified. Sincerely, R. Alexander Acosta United States Attorney cc: Special Agent By: Assistant United States Attorney EFTA00233818

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/200 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida 500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm (leach. FL 33401 (56!) 8204711 Facsimile, (SW 820-8777 August I I, 2006 D F; VI! CIF IN %/LAMM j,.. Mi Re: Crime Victims' and Witnessa:Righis Dear Miss Pursuant to the Justice for All Act of 2004, as a victim and/ur witness of a federal offense, you have a number of rights. Those rights are: (I) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused. (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused. (3) The right not to be excluded from any public court proceeding, unless the court determ nes that your testimony may be materially altered i Cyan are present for other portions of a proceeding. (4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, or sentencing. (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case. (6) The right to full and timely restitution as provided in law. (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay. (8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy. f Members of the U.S. DepartMent of Justice and other federal investigative agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, must use their best efforts to make sure that these rights are rotected. If you have any concerns in this regard, please feel free to contact me at, or Special Agent front the Federal Bureau of Investigation at You also can contact the Justice Department's Office for Victims of Crime in Washington, D.C. at I That Office has a website at www.ovc.gov. You can seek the advice of an attorney with respect to the rights listed above and, if you believe that the rights set forth above arc being violated, you have the right to petition the Court for relief. EFTA00233819

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 11 of 21 AUGUST II, 2006 PAGE 2 In addition to these rights, you are entitled to counseling and medical services, and in from intimidation and harassment. If the Court determines that you arc a victim, you entitled to restitution from the perpetrator. A list of counseling and medical service pi 0. .. be provided to you, if you so desire. If you or your family is subjected to any Unix • harassment, please contact Special Agent IIIIM=Dr myself immediately. It is p, someone working on behalf of the targets of the investigation may contact you. Such c4,.• • not violate the law. However, if you are contacted, you have the choice of speaking to i or refusing to do so. If you refuse and feel that you are being threatened or harassed, ill:. Contact Special Agent=ar myself. You also are entitled to notification of upcoming case events. At this time, your investigation. If anyone is charged in connection with the investigation, you will be no, Sincerely, R. Alexander Acosta United States Attorney By: Assistant United States Attorney cc: Special Agent F.B.I. I I EFTA00233820

Case 9:08-gy-89736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15L20(111,. Pageiaof 21 January 10, 2008 Re: Case Number. Dearl This case la currently under investigation. This can be a lengthy process and we request your continued patience while we conduct a thorough Investigation. U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI - West Palm Beach Suite 500 505 South Elegiac Drive West Palm Beach, FL 334111 Phone: (681)833-7517 Fax: (561) 833-7970 As a crime victim, you have the following rights under 18 United States Code § 3771: (1) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused: (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, Involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused; (3) The right not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding, unless the court, after receiving clear and convincing evidence. determines that testimony by the victim would be materially altered It the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding; (4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding In the district court Involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding; (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case; (8) The right to full end timely restitution as provided In law: (7) The fight to proceedings free from unreasonable delay; (8) The right to be treated with fairness end with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy. We will make our best efforts to ensure you are accorded the rights described. Most of these rights pertain to events occurring after the arrest or indlcbnent of an Individual for the crime. and it win become the responsibility of the prosecuting United States Attorney's Otfice to ensure you are accorded those rights. You may also seek the advice of a private attorney wt respect to these rights. The Victim Notification System (VNS) is designed to provide you with direct information regarding the case as it proceeds through the criminal fucks system. You may obtain current Information about this matter on the Internet al WVYW.NotIfy.USDOJ.GOV or from the VNS Call Center at 1-865-DOJ-4YOU (1-866-365- 4968) (TDD/TTY: 1.866-2284618) (International: 1-502-213-2767). In addition, you may use tne Can center or Internet to update your contact information end/or change your decision about participation M the notification program. If you update your Information to include a current email address, VN will send information to that address. You will r following Victim Identification Number (VIN) d Personal Identification Number (PIN) nytime you contact the Call Center and the firs time you log on to VNS on the Internet. In addition, thefirst Ume you access the VNS Internet site, you will be prompted to enter your last name (or business name) as currently contained In VNS. The name you should enter is a EFTA00233821

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07115/2008' Pagre 1Z BT 21 It you have additional questions which Involve this matter, please contact the office listed above. When you cal, please provide the file number located at the top of this letter. Please remember. your participation in the notification part of this program Is voluntary. In order to continue to receive notifications, it is your responsibility to keep your contact information current. Sincerely. Victim Specialist EFTA00233822

Case 9:08,cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07dA5J$00€-i Paget/it/of 21 U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI - West Paint Beach Suite 560 505 South Flagler Drive West Palm Beach FL 33401 Phone: (581) 833.7517 Fax: (561) 833-7970 January 10.2008 James Eisenberg Ono Cleartake Center Ste 704 Australian South West Palm Beach. FL 33401 Re. air Dear James Eisenberg: You have requested to receive notifications to This case is currently under Investigation. This can be a lengthy process and we request your continued patience while wo conduct a thorough investigation. Asa alma victim, you have the following rights under 18 Untied States Code § 3771: (1) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused; (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, Involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused; (3) The right net to be excluded from any such public court proceeding. unless tie court, after receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim would be materially altered if the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding; (It) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding In the district court involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding; (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case; (6) The right to lull and timely restitution as provided In law, (7) The right to proceedings bee from unreasonable delay: (8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy. We will make our best efforts to ensure you are accorded the rights descnbed. Most of these rights pertain to events occurring after the arrest or Indictment of an individual for the crime, and It will become the responsibility of the prosecuting tinned States Attorney's Office to ensure you are accorded those rights. You may also seek the advice of a private attorney with respect to these rights. The Victim Notification System (VNS) is designed to provide you with direct Information regarding the case as it proceeds through the criminal justice system. YoU may obtain current Information about this matter on the Internet at WWW.Notify.USDOJ.GOV or from the VNS Call Center at 1.886-DOJ-YOU (1.866-365- 4968) (TDD/TTY:1-866-228-4619) (International: 1.502.213-2767). In addition, you may use the Call Center or Internet to update your contact Information and/or change your decisleri about panic-Sieben in the notification program. If you update your Information to Include a current emelt address, VNS will send information to that address. You will the following Victim Identification Number (VIN)illit and Personal Identification Number (PIN) IMMnytim contact e you the Can Center end the rrst me you log on to VNS on the Internet. In addltien. the first Ume you access the VNS Internet site, you will be prompted to enter your last name (or business name) as currently contained in VNS. The name you should enter is Eisenberg. EFTA00233823

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07146/2008, D, Page *POI 21 'we ‘ 3/4 sfe If you have additional questions which involve this matter, please contact the office listed above. When you call, please provide the the number located at the top of this letter. Please remember, your participation in the notification part of this program is voluntary. In order to continue to receive nolafications, it is your responsibility to keep your contact Information current. EFTA00233824

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket NM 51-20 May 30. 2008 Re: De Nest U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI - West Palm Beach Suite 500 505 South Flagler Drive West Palm Beach, Fl. 33401 Phone: (561)833-7517 Fax: (561) 833-7970 • g.i ••••41.ift` t "i4VAlf Your name was referred to the FBI's Victim Assistance Program as being a possible victim of a federal crime. We appreciate your assistance and cooperation while we ere investigating this case. We would like to make you aware of the victim services that may be available to you and to answer any questions you may have regarding the criminal justice process throughout the Investigation. Our program is part of the FBI's effort to ensure the victims are treated with respect end we provided information about their rights under federal law. These rights include notification of the status of the case. The enclosed brochures provide information about the FBI's Victim Assistance Program, resources and instructions for accessing the Victim Notification System (VNS). VNS is designed to provide you welt information regarding the status of your case. This case Is currently under Investigation. This can be a lengthy process and we request your continued patience while we conduct a thorough investigation. As a crime victim, you have the following rights under 18 United States Code § 3771: (1) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused: (2) The right to reasonable, accurate, end timely notice of any public court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused; (3) The right not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding, unless the court, after receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim would be materially altered If the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding; (4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea. sentencing, or any parole proceeding; (5) The reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government In the case; (6) The right to full and timely restitution es provided In law; (7) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay, (8) The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy. We will make our best efforts to ensure you ere accorded the rights described, Most of these rights pertain to events occurring after the arrest or indictment of an individual for the crime, and it will become the responsibility of the prosecuting United States Attorney's Office to ensure you are accorded those rights. You may also seek the advice of e private attomey with respect to these rights. The Victim Notification System (VNS) Is designed to provide you with direct information regarding the case as it proceeds through the criminal justice system. You may obtain current information about this matter on the Internet at WYV1A'.Notify.USDOJ.GOV or from the VNS Call Center at 1.866-DCJ-4YOU (1-866-365- 4968) (TOO/TTY71-866-228-4619) (International: 1-502-213-2767). In addition, you may use the Call Center or Internet to update your contact information anWor change your decision about participation In the notification program. if you update your Information to Include a current email address, VNS will send information to that address. You will need the following Victim Identification Number (VIN)-' end Personal IdentificaUon Number (PIN me you contact the Call Center end the first time you log or to VNS on the Internet. In addition, the rst lime you access the VNS Internet slle, you will be prompted to enter your last name (or business name) as currently contained in VNS. The name you should enter is *pa EFTA00233825

CaseVn9:.08-ev-80-736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07,45,2806,,, Pagelgtof 21 ...., ....---- N./ If you have additional questions which involve this matter, please contact the office Ested above. When you call, please provide the file number located at the top of this letter. Please remember, your participation in tne notitcation pan of this program is voluntary. In order to continue to receive notifications, ft is your responsibility to keep your contact information current. Sincerely, V.chm Specialist TOTAL P.07 EFTA00233826

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 18 of 21 •—• so GOVERMENT EXHIBIT U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida NO.08.80776CV-MARRA EXHIBIT NO. 6 500 South Australian Ave.. Suite 400 West Palm Beach. FL 33401 (561)820-8711 Facsimile: (561) 820-8777 July 9, 2008 VIA FACSIMILE Brad Edwards, Esq. The Law Offices of Brad Edwards & Associates, LLC Re: 'Jeffrey Epsteirl NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM Dear Mr. Edwards: By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client, On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein) entered a plea of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution) and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454/OOCXMB and 2008-cf- 00938 I A XXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of Community Control 1, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court. In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain conditions. One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following: "Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein EFTA00233827

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/15/2008 Page 19 of 21 440 BRAD EDWARDS, ESQ NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM a Va. July 9, 2008 PAGE 2 or 2 had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client, C - is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an enumerated offense. Should your client decide to file a claim against Jeffrey Epstein, his attorney, Jack Goldberger, asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney's Office nor the Federal Bureau of Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation; however, if you do file a claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an enumerated offense, please provide notice of that denial to the undersigned. Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this examination s and express the heartfelt regards of m self and Special Agentsl for the health and well-being of Ms. By: cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ASSISTANT U.S. ATIORNEY EFTA00233828