IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA¶
Case No. 50-2009CA040800XXXXMBAG¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,¶
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,¶
PART 7¶
v.¶
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN individually, and J. , individually,¶
Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff.¶
PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFF DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF II1S REVI EIN'S APPENDIX OF BUS MOTION IN LIMINE¶
Plaintifl7Counter-Defendant Jeffrey E in support of his revised Omnibus Motiop4 : tein") files this Appendix of Documents¶
Co s¶
| No. | Date | Document |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1/5/11 | Epstein's Motion to Amend Complaint (D.E. 195) |
| 2 | 4/9/09 | Plaintiff's Motion to Strike References to Non-Prosecution Agreement or, in the Alternative, to Lift Protective Order Barring Jane Doe's Attorneys from Revealing Provisions in the Agreement (D.E. 32); <i>Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; S.D. Fla. Case No. 9:08-cv-80893-KAM |
| 3 | 4/17/09 | Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (D.E. 38) <i>Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; S.D. Fla. Case No. 9:08-cv-80893-KAM |
| 4 | 4/30/09 | Jeffrey Epstein's Deposition Transcript Excerpts (pp. 148, 151-152); <i>E.W. v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; 15 th Judicial Circuit Case No. 50-2008-CA-028058-XXXX-MB |
| No. | Date | Document |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | 6/19/09 | Plaintiff's Motion for Injunction Restraining Fraudulent Transfer of Asserts, Appointment of a Receiver to Take Charge of Property of Epstein, and to Post a $15 Million Bond to Secure Potential Judgment (D.E. 165); <i>Jane Doe 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; S.D. Fla. Case No. 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED] |
| 6 | 11/5/09 | Order Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Injunction, etc. (D.E. 400) <i>Jane Doe 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; S.D. Fla. Case No. 08-cv-80119-MARRA/ [REDACTED] |
| 7 | 7/22/09 | Letters from [REDACTED] re depositions |
| 8 | 7/27/09 | Complaint (D.E. 1) <i>L.M. v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; S.D. Fla. Case No. 9:08-cv-81092-KAM |
| 9 | N/A | Court Docket <i>L.M. v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; S.D. Fla. Case No. 9:08-cv-81092-KAM |
| 10 | 8/11/09 8/24/09 | Re-Notices of Taking Videotaped Deposition of Donald Trump <i>Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; S.D. Fla. Case No. 9:08-cv-80893-KAM |
| 11 | 8/10/09 | Plaintiff's Request for Entry Upon Land (D.E. 143) <i>E.W. v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; 15 th Judicial Circuit Case No. 50-2008-CA-028058-XXXX-MB |
| 12 | 8/24/09 | Epstein's Motion for Protective Order Regarding Depositions of Lawrence Visoski and David Hart Rogers (D.E. 159) <i>L.M. v. Jeffrey Epstein</i> ; 15 th Judicial Circuit Case No. 50-2008-CA-028051-XXXX-MB |
| 13 | 11/3/09 | Article: <u>South Florida Sun-Sentinel</u> - <i>Scott Rothstein's investment deals seemed too good to be true</i> |
| 14 | 11/6/09 | Article: <u>New Times Broward-Palm Beach</u> - <i>Scott Rothstein: The Jeffrey Epstein and Bill Clinton Ploy</i> |
| 15 | 11/9/09 | Verified Complaint for Forfeiture <i>In Rem</i> (D.E. 1) <i>United States of America v. Scott W. Rothstein</i> (Forfeiture Action); S.D. Fla. Case No. 0:09-CV-61780-WJZ |
| 16 | 11/12/09 | Article: <u>South Florida Sun-Sentinel</u> - <i>FBI doubts Rothstein ran a Ponzi scheme alone</i> |
| No. | Date | Document |
|---|---|---|
| 17 | 11/20/09 | <b>Complaint (without exhibits)</b> (D.E. 3) <i>Razorback Funding, LLC v. Rothstein</i> 17th Jud. Cir. Case No. 062009CA062943AXXXCE |
| 18 | 11/23/09 | <b>Amended Verified Complaint for Forfeiture <i>In Rem</i></b> (D.E. 14) <i>United States of America v. Scott W. Rothstein</i> (Forfeiture Action); S.D. Fla. Case No. 0:09-CV-61780-WJZ |
| 19 | 11/23/09 | <b>Article: <u>South Florida Sun-Sentinel – You're in a town full of thieves</u></b> |
| 20 | 11/24/09 | <b>Article: <u>The Miami Herald – Feds: Scott Rothstein Ponzi scheme paid salaries at law firm</u></b> |
| 21 | 11/25/09 | <b>Amended Complaint (without exhibits)</b> (D.E. 12) <i>Razorback Funding, LLC v. Rothstein</i> 17th Jud. Cir. Case No. 062009CA062943AXXXCE |
| 22 | 12/1/09 | <b>Information</b> (D.E. 1) <i>United States v. Rothstein</i> ; S.D. Fla. Case No. 0:09-cr-60331-JIC |
| 23 | 12/7/09 | <b>Complaint (without exhibits)</b> (D.E. 5) |
| 24 | 6/30/17 | <b>Affidavit of Jeffrey Ep [REDACTED]</b> (D.E. 931) |
| 25 | 11/10/17 | <b>Bradley J. Edwards' Deposition Transcript Excerpts</b> (pp. 163-164, 166, 227-229, 259-260, 276-278, 321-322, 338-339) |
| 26 | 3/23/10 | <b>Bradley J. [REDACTED]' Deposition Transcript Excerpts</b> (pp. 112, 116-117, 123-125, 230-231) |
| 27 | 10/10/13 | <b>[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED]' Deposition Transcript Excerpts</b> (pp. 205) |
| 28 | 7/26/09 8/13/09 10/23/09 | <b>Email from Pricilla Nascimento to Scott Rothstein</b> <b>Email from [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] to Priscilla Nascimento</b> <b>Email from Ken Jenne to Scott Rothstein</b> |
| 29 | 6/14/12 | <b>Scott Rothstein's Deposition Transcript Excerpts</b> (pp. 23-26, 52-53) |
| No. | Date | Document |
|---|---|---|
| 30 | 12/12/11 | Scott Rothstein's Deposition Transcript Excerpts (pp. 59-62); |
| 31 | 12/21/11 | Scott Rothstein's Deposition Transcript Excerpts (p. 2278) |
| Razorback Funding. LLC v. Rothstein; 17th Jud. Cir. Case No. | ||
| 32 | 3/17/10 | Jeffrey Epstein's Deposition Transcript Excerpts (pp 1 14, 19- |
| 20, 23, 25-26, 28-34, 36-39, 48-55, 57, 59-60, 62-69, 6-80, | ||
| 33 | 11/9/17 | Amended Exhibit List (D.E. 10 |
| 34 | 11/15/17 | Epstein's Objections to A e ed Exhibit List |
| 35 | 11/9/17 | Seventh Amended emental Witness List |
| 36 | 1/25/12 | Jeffrey Epstein's Depv n Transcript Excerpts (pp. 19-21) |
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE¶
I certify that the foregoing document has been furnished to the attorneys listed on the Service List below on November 21, 2017, through the Court's e-filing portal pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516(b)(1).¶
LINK & ROCKENBACH, PA
1555 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 301
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
(561) 727-3600; (561) 727-3601 [fax]¶
By: /s/ Scott J. Link
Scott J. Link (FBN 602991)
Kara Berard Rockenbach (FBN 44903)
Angela M. Many (FBN 26680)
Primary: Scott@linkrocklaw.com
Primary: Kara@linkrocklaw.com
Primary: Angela@linkrocklaw.com
Secondary: Tina@linkrocklaw.com
Secondary: Troy@linkrocklaw.com
Secondary: Tanya@linkrocklaw.com
Secondary: Eservice@linkrocklaw.com¶
Trial Counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant
Jeffrey Epstein¶
SERVICE LIST¶
| Jack Scarola Searcy, Denny, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 <u>mep@searcylaw.com</u> <u>jsx@searcylaw.com</u> <u>scarolateam@searcylaw.com</u> <i>Co-Counsel for Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff</i> J. [REDACTED] | Nichole J. Segal Burlington & Rockenbach, P.A. Courthouse Commons, Suite 350 444 West Railroad Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401 <u>njs@FLAppellateLaw.com</u> <u>kbt@FLAppellateLaw.com</u> <i>Co-Counsel for Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff</i> J. [REDACTED] |
|---|---|
| ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <p><b>J. [REDACTED]</b> <b>Pottinger LLC</b> 425 N. Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-3268 <a href="mailto:brad@epllc.com">brad@epllc.com</a> <a href="mailto:staff.efile@pathtojustice.com">staff.efile@pathtojustice.com</a> <i>Co-Counsel for Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff</i> <b>J. [REDACTED]</b></p> | <p>Marc S. Nurik Law Offices of Marc S. Nurik One E. Broward Boulevard, Suite 700 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 <a href="mailto:marc@nuriklaw.com">marc@nuriklaw.com</a> <i>Counsel for Defendant Scott Rothstein</i></p> |
|---|---|
| <p>Jack A. Goldberger Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue S., Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 <a href="mailto:jgoldberger@agwpa.com">jgoldberger@agwpa.com</a> <a href="mailto:smahoney@agwpa.com">smahoney@agwpa.com</a> <i>Co-Counsel for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant</i> <i>Jeffrey Epstein</i></p> |
APP. 26¶
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO. 50 2009CA040800XXXXXMB AG
Complex Litigation, Fla.R.Civ.Pro. 1201¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Plaintiff,
-vs- VOLUME I OF II,¶
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually,
[REDACTED], J. [REDACTED],
individually, and L.M. individually,
Defendants.¶
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF BRADLEY J. BOWARDS, ESQUIRE¶
(Tuesday, March 23, 20010
10:00 - 5:07 p.m.¶
2139 Palm Beach Lakes, Boulevard
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401¶
Reported By:
Cynthia [REDACTED], RPR, FPR
Notary Public, State of Florida
Prose Court Reporting
Job No.: 1333¶
APPEARANCES:¶
On behalf of the Plaintiff:
ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE
BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP
303 Banyan Boulevard
Suite 400
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
Phone: 561.842.2820¶
and
JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 1409
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-5012
Phone: 561.659.8300¶
and
On behalf of the Plaintiff:
ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, ESQUIRE
HARVARD LAW SCHOOL
Hauser 520
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
Phone: 617.496.2020¶
On behalf of the Defendant:
JACK SCAROLA, ESQUIRE
SEARCY, DENNEY, SCAROLA,
BARNHART & SHIPLEY, P.A.
2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard
West Palm Beach, Florida 33409
Phone: 561.686.6300¶
ALSO PRESENT:
Jeffrey Epstein
[REDACTED] Kozak, Videographer
Prose Reporting Services¶
INDEX¶
EXAMINATION DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT
[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED], ESQUIRE
BY MR. CRITTON 5¶
B X H I B I T S¶
EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE
PLAINTIFF'S EX. 1 ALFREDO RODRIGUEZ 211
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFF'S EX. 2 COMPLAINT 239
PLAINTIFF'S EX. 3 JULY 22, 2009 276
FACSMILE¶
PROCEEDINGS¶
Deposition taken before Cynthia [REDACTED],
Registered Professional Reporter and Florida
Professional Reporter, and Notary Public in and for
the State of Florida at Large, in the above cause.¶
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are now on video
record. This is Media Number One in the
videotaped deposition of [REDACTED] in the
matter of Jeffrey Epstein versus Scott
Rothstein, [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED], and L.M.¶
Today is Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010 at
10:00 a.m. We're here in the law offices
of Searcy, Denney, Scarola; Barnhart &
Shipley, 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard,
West Palm Beach, Florida.¶
My name is Joe Kozak. I am the
videographer. The court reporter is Cindy
[REDACTED] from Prose, Prose Court Reporting
Agency.¶
Will counsel please introduce
yourselves, and then the court reporter
will swear in the witnesses.¶
MR. CRITTON: Bob Critton on behalf of the¶
1 A. I don't know that that's a correct statement 2 Q. You don't know one way or the other? 3 A. The law firm was constantly expanding and 4 constantly under constriction. For the most part in the 5 beginning the cases were kept in a, in a filing cabinet 6 in my office and later were kept in a filing cabinet, I 7 believe, in a locked storage location in another area of 8 the office. 9 Q. And did any attorney have access to that 3.0 storage area or do you know? 11 A. I believe any attorney could have had access. 12 Q. And if the attorney could have access, you 13 wouldn't necessarily know about it, true? 14 A. Correct. 15 Q. In the trustee's filing that they made in 16 response to my motion to preserve evidence, they 17 indicated that 13 boxes relating to Jeffrey Epstein 18 had been removed by the FBI or the government when 19 they came into the RRA offices. Do you remember 20 seeing that pleading? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Okay. Are you, were there, in fact, 13 23 boxes of material or at least 13 banker's boxes of 24 material that related to matters directed to, 25 whether, whatever the content related to Mr. Epstein¶
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 • 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 23. 22 23 24 25 did they also have swipe cards so that they could access different areas in the firm? A. I believe so. Q. With regard to when you joined RRA, did you ever have any further meetings with Mr. Rothstein; that is, from the day you started at RRA, did you ever meet Mr. Rothstein again? A. By meet him again — Q. Did you ever have a meeting with him again regarding your position in the firm? A. No. Q. Okay. Did you ever mealy/jih him and a number of other individuals with mgafda to firm 1 business? A. No. Q. Finn cases? A. I don't believe so. Q. Was Mr. Rothstein over present in any meeting where any of your cases were discussed? Let me strike that- Was Mr. Rothstein ever present wherein at any meeting where any of the cases against Jeffrey Epstein were discussed? Don't tell me cement; just was he ever present. A. How would I know that? I don't know. He could, he could be in a meeting right now where the case¶
1 that you were aware of; that is, hard copies? 2 A. I don't know. 3 Q. Okay. Could have been more, could bays 4 been less; you just don't know? _ _ 5 A. Correct. 6 Q. If I understood your testimony, 7 Mr. Rothstein, Mr. Rosenfejcit, any other attorney or 8 investigator could have accosted those files 9 depending or where they were within the firm, true? to A. I am not sum exactly who could have accessed 11 it. You asked me if the attorneys could and the 12 attorneys had swipecar& for various locked areas. 13 Each attorney I believe had access to any area where 14 those files werelocated. I believe so. 15 Q. Qkay. Well, during the time you were 16 there did an individual by the name of Ken Jenne 17 work there? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Okay. Did an individual by the name of 20 Mike Fisten work for the firrn -- 21. A. Ycs. 22 Q. -- for RRA? Were they employees of the 23 firm or were they independent contractors? 24 A. I don't know. 25 Q. Okay. During the time they were there,¶
1 could be discussed for all! know. 2 Q. I'm sorry. Obviously, where you, where 3 you were present. Where you ever present at a 4 meeting where Mr. Rothstein was also present where 5 the Epstein cases were discussed? 6 A. No. 7 Q. (Did lfe sie7r call you to communicate with 8 (yot illyou either by phone, video conference, in 9 any fashion to discuss any act aspect of the cases 10 Otan inihridiuraiisfreffro—y-EpTfelit? 11 MR. SCAROLA: You can answer that. 12 (THE-WITNESS: He has cornmuniatalTiEflu 13 (various, about legal issues related to the 14 (as T,iell as commented about the case to me on 15 aN ry few occasions but I wouldWleilifiiii 16 (three times 17 BY MR. CRM'ON: 18 Q. During the time that you, from April of 3.9 '09 through late October of '09, correct? 20 A. In that time period, where, is that when 21 these - 22 Q. Correct. 23 A. — things happened? 24 Q. Well, that's the time you were there; 25 that's what I am asking.¶
1 A. When I was there.
2 Q. And do you, can you remember the date, any
3 specific date that you spoke with him?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Do you remember any specific month that
6 you would have had one of the -- well, what did you
7 say something less than five conversations? I don't
8 want to misquote you.
9 A. I said less than three conversations.
10 Q. All right. So, something less than three
11 conversations you had with Mr. Rothstein regarding
12 Epstein cases, either legal issue or a comment, some
13 comment about the case to you, correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. All right. The first time that he ever
16 spoke to you, did he call you or did you call him?
17 A. I, I never called Scott Rothstein about
18 anything. █, take that back. About anything related
19 to Jeffrey Epstein.
20 Q. The first conversation that you can recall
21 where either a legal issue or a comment was made
22 about Jeffrey Epstein by Mr. Rothstein to you, he
23 obviously initiated the call?
24 A. It wasn't a call.
25 Q. What was it?¶
1 A. A comment in passing. And I believe I was
2 sitting at a table in BOVA when he walked over to my
3 table and commented about Jeffrey Epstein.
4 Q. Okay. Who were you there with at the
5 time?
6 A. I don't remember.
7 Q. Were you with some friends? Were you with
8 other lawyers?
9 A. All right. I am jogging my memory. I, I have
10 no idea.
11 Q. What did he say?
12 MR. SCAROLA: To the extent that you can
13 answer that question without disclosing any
14 mental impressions with regard to the lawsuit
15 or any attorney-client privileged
16 communications, you can answer.
17 To the extent that it might invade
18 either the work-product or attorney-client
19 privilege, you should not respond.
20 THE WITNESS: Can I talk to you?
21 MR. SCAROLA: Sure.
22 (A brief recess was held.)
23 MR. SCAROLA: Are we on?
24 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Yeah.
25 MR. SCAROLA: The record should reflect¶
1 that we have had an opportunity to consult and
2 I have advised Mr. █ that there is no
3 privilege protection for the particular
4 communications involved.
5 BY MR. CRITTON:
6 Q. What did he say?
7 A. He commented to me, I want you to get that
8 pedophile.
9 Q. And your response was what?
10 A. I didn't respond.
11 Q. All right. Second conversation that you
12 can remember, where were you?
13 A. I had just come out of the conference room on
14 the main floor after taking a deposition in another
15 case. And he walked by and said, did you get that Fing
16 pedophile yet.
17 Q. And your response?
18 A. Again.
19 Q. No response.
20 A. Didn't respond.
21 Q. On the first occasion when he came over
22 and if I understand correctly, all he said was the
23 comment that you referenced and then he left. You
24 didn't respond and then he just made the comment and
25 then left?¶
1 A. Right. He was walking by in his normal, loud,
2 ostentatious kind of way, greeting everybody in the
3 restaurant. Came over to my table and he feels, at
4 least my impression was obliged to say something to
5 everyone. And that's the comment he said to me.
6 And if you've ever seen him, he is
7 basically always just skipping around and he hoped
8 on over somewhere else. So, yes, it was in,
9 literally in passing.
10 Q. Okay. How, how, how did he even know you
11 had cases involving Mr. Epstein?
12 A. I don't know.
13 Q. Because I think you testified earlier that
14 you had never discussed an Epstein case with
15 Mr. Rothstein one-on-one, correct?
16 A. Absolutely, true.
17 Q. You never discussed an Epstein case or
18 either of your three clients with Mr. Rothstein even
19 with a group of people around, correct?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. (All right) (Do you remember a third
22 occasion that he spoke to you regarding Epstein
23 related occasion, cases?)
24 A. (Anything else that he ever spoke with me about
25 related to Epstein related issues is attorney-client and¶
1 work-prodirainqlegerfififon—ifalron thifl 2 (to divulge.¶
3 Q. Okay. I am not — I need to still ask the 4 last question though. I thought you said earlier is 5 that you never had any substantive oonversations, 6 maybe I misunderstood, with Mr. Rothstein about the 7 Epstein cases. Did I misunderstand you? 8 A. I don't believe that that was — I had 9 conversations at a point about legal issues related to 10 Jeffrey Epstein and that's, that's it.¶
11 Q. Was that a one conversation? Was that a number of conversations that you had where legal issues were discussed as to, separate and apart from the two comments he made about the case to you which you were, you waived any privilege, work-product or attorney-client privilege? A. I, I can't tell you. If you and I this 18 morning had a conversation and then we took a bathroom 19 break, and we had the same continuing conversation, I don't lmow if that's one conversation or two. But I can tell you the, the only time I remember Scott Rothstein participating in any way, shape, or form in any conversation related to anything substantive dealing with, and not dealing with any specific client but a legal issue, was on a particular one-day event, one-day¶
1 A. Scott Rothstein's office. 2 Q. Had you been called up to meet with 3 Mr. Rothstein? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Okay. And who contacted you and told you 6 that Mr. Rothstein wanted to see you? 7 A. His, his secretary or paralegal or something. 8 Q. And did you get a call saying Mr. 9 Rothstein would like to sec you right now, or was it 10 something that was scheduled? 11 A. It was not scheduled. 12 Q. So, you got a call and somebody told you, 13 come up, Scott, Scott wants to see you. 14 A. I don't remember exactly what was used, but it 3.5 was1 believe, Russell istliscussing a legal issue with 16 Scott Rothstein; cot* to his office. 17 Q. Okay. Wet the legal issue, did it involve 18 one of the Epstein cases or the Epstein cases? 19 A. It, it was 8 legal issue related to -- yes. 20 Q.: Okay, How long, how much time did you 21 spend well, let me strike that. So, when you 22 %maim to Mr. Rothstein's office, it's --I 23 understand you had to go through some security to 2 W: O A. You've seen the video?¶
Page 1 1 conversation, if you want to call it. 2 Q. And that's at what time? At that time 3 legal issues were discussed? 4 MR. SCAROLA: Legal issue wa testimony, a particular legal issu 6 MR. CRITTON: Correct. A feral issue. 7 BY MR. CRITTON: B Q. When did that occur, I this one-day 9 discussion or a day discussio regarding a 10 specific legal issueV., 11 A. I don't latow. \ 12 Q. Was he present, fie Mr. Rothstein and you 13 present at thrilame elm.? 14 A. Ycs. - 15 Q. Okay: Was anyone else there with you? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Who else was present? 1B A. Russ Adler, someone was on the telephone. I'm 19 not remembering who that was. I can't remember. I will 20 tell you if I do remember. 21 Q. Was Bill Berger there? 22 A. No. 23 Q. And, you don't. So, there was you. Well, 24 let me strike that. Where did the conversation take 25 place?¶
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. I actually haven't. A. 01), really. Okay. Yeah, it's — Q. In order to get into Mr. Rothstein's — A. It's like a compound. Q. Kind of concern you that this guy running the firm had a compound? A. I -- at the time, no. In retrospect, okay, now that we all know how this whole thing unfolded, but at the time, no. Q. Had you ever worlosd in an office? And you had worked at some big offices. You worked at the State Attorney's office in Broward County? A. True. Q. You worked for, I think for Kubicki Draper? A. Correct. Q. Did Mr. Kubicki, Gene Kubicki ever have a compound around his office that you had to go through any typo of security either people and/or locked doors or secured doors in order to access him? A. No. Q. Had yoq ever worked other than the Broward County Sheriffs, at the Broward County State Attorney's Office with, and with Kublcki Draper, had¶
1 you ever worked for a large firm?
2 A. No. You just named all the places I have
3 worked.
4 Q. All right. Is this the first time then
5 that you had been to Mr. Rothstein's office that he
6 called you up there?
7 A. No.
8 Q. You had been in his office before?
9 A. One time.
10 Q. And what was that occasion?
11 A. I was having back surgery, and I went there to
12 tell him I am having back surgery. As you know I had
13 back surgery, and I was telling him I don't know how
14 long I'm going to be off because, you know, the recovery
15 time is different for everybody.
16 Q. Is that the only thing you talked about,
17 the back surgery?
18 A. That's the only thing we talked about.
19 Q. Did the meeting you had with Scott, when
20 you went up, when you were called up to his office
21 that day, did that occur before your back surgery
22 episode or meeting or after?
23 A. After.
24 Q. So, you would, you had back surgery. I
25 think you were out two or three weeks and then you¶
1 Q. How many security, different security
2 levels did you have to go through in order to get,
3 to go have your meeting with Mr. Rothstein and
4 Mr. Adler?
5 A. Two.
6 Q. And to your recollection you don't
7 remember ever seeing a security person?
8 A. Right.
9 Q. Okay. Who was in the office?
10 A. Well --
11 Q. I'm sorry.
12 A. I do not remember seeing a security person
13 manning the door or granting access to his office. I
14 saw security people every day in the office of RRA
15 Q. (All right. And when you got into the
16 office, Mr. Rothstein was there?
17 (A. Yes.
18 Q. Mr. Adler?
19 (A. Yes.
20 Q. There was someone on the telephone who you
21 don't recall?
22 (A. Yes.
23 Q. (O. [REDACTED]. Was there anyone else present?
24 (A. Not that I remember.
25 Q. Okay. Was, were there any investigators,¶
1 returned to the office, and then that meeting would
2 have occurred?
3 (A. Yeah, that's correct.
4 Q. When you, in order to get into the office
5 just as you have described it as a bunker, how many,
6 did you have to go through any security people to
7 get into --
8 (MR. SCAROLA: No, I think the description
9 was a compound;
10 (MR. CRITTON: I will use compound. Are
11 you more comfortable with compound or a bunker?
12 (I have seen it described both ways. I haven't
13 seen the video, but I have seen it described
14 both ways.)
15 (THE WITNESS: I will describe it for you.)
16 (Well, first I will answer your question)
17 (Security people, I don't know if there was ever
18 a time where one would have to go through
19 security people to get to his office. But on
20 the day or two days that I have been in his
21 office, I did not encounter any security
22 personnel.)
23 (BY MR. CRITTON:)
24 Q. Did you have to be buzzed into the office?
25 (A) (It was more complicated than that)¶
1 was Mr. Jenne or Mr. Fisten present?
2 (A. No.)
3 Q. (So, it was, you, Rothstein, Adler, and
4 someone on the phone; that's it?
5 (A. From what I remember.)
6 Q. (How long did the meeting last?)
7 (A. I don't know how long the meeting lasted.)
8 Q. (Five minutes or was it a substantially
9 long meeting?)
10 (A) (Do you want how long I was in the meeting, I
11 can give you an answer. How long the meeting lasted, I
12 have no idea.)
13 Q. (How long did the meeting last while you
14 were present?)
15 (A. Less than five minutes.)
16 Q. (Was the value of any of the three cases
17 discussed at all?)
18 (A) (No.)
19 Q. (Did Mr. Rothstein, did Mr. Rothstein
20 appear to be knowledgeable about your cases?)
21 (A) (No.)
22 Q. Mr. Adler, was Mr. Adler someone that you
23 had discussed the cases with on a somewhat regular
24 basis --
25 (MR. SCAROLA: Objection, compound.)¶
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 23. 22 23 24 25 BY-MR. CRITTON:) _not content. Was Mr. Adler someone that you had discussed these Epstein cases with.) prior• to that meeting?) Q. Was he familiar with the cases, generally? A. He attended Jeffrey Epstein's deposition, so he heard the questions asked and heard the Fifth Amendment invocation and so the adverse Inferences and was therefore informed — MR. CRITTON: Move to strike as nonresponsive. BY MR. CRITT0N: Q. My question is was he familiar generally with the subject matter of the litigation against Mr. Epstein? A. In that he read the newspaper articles about molesting a bunch of children, yes, he was familiar with the subject matter. Q. And he read did you provide him with copies of the pleadings in these cases when they came to RRA? A. No. Q. What was the topic? What was the legal issue that you discussed — well, let me strike¶
1 issue. 2 If it was not an issue that was 3 identified in the course of the 4 proceedings to opposing counsel, I am going to object and instruct you not to 6 answer on the basis of the work-product 7 privilege. a THE WITNESS: Work-product privilege. 9 BY MR. CRITTON: 10 Q. Do you know an individual by the namo of 11 Fandry, F-a-n-d-r-y? 12 A. That name doesn't ringaball right now. 13 Q. Do you know him to be -- does that name 14 mean anything with regard to, as an investigator, 15 Fandry? 16 A. That's a male? 17 Q. Pardon? 18 A. That's it first name or a last name? 19 Q. Last name, Richard Fandry. 20 A. I bow an investigator named Rick that did 21 work, was contracted out by RRA to do investigative 22 work. I don't know his last name but 23 Q. Did, did Rick ever do any work on any of 24 the Epstein cases to your knowledge? 25 A. I believe so.¶
1 that. Who raised the legal issue, did 2 Mr. Adler raise it or did Mr. Rothstein? 3 A. I don't know. 4 Q. Okay. Well, how did the, who started the, 5 if you were there I think you said foie minuteslwho 6 did the talking? 7 A. When I came in the, in the office, it was in 8 the middle of a discussion. 9 Q. Was a question posed to you? 10 A. The question was on the table at least from my 11 perspective coming into the room and was then directed 12 at me, what's the aliments this particular legal issue. 13 Q. And what wits the legal issue? 14 MIL SCAROLA: Lees talk forjust a 15 second. 16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER• Are we going off the 17 record? 18 MR. SCAROLA: Actually, we don't oven have 19 to go off the record. Stay right here. 20 If this was an issue that vies 21 identified during the course of the legal 22 proceedings to opposing counsel, then I am 23 going to allowyou to you identify the 24 issue without getting into any of the 25 substance of the discussion regarding that¶
Q. Do you know what the name of his business 2 was? 3 A. NO. 4 Q. Is Rick still being employed at the 5 current time by your firm to do investigation? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Is Mr. -- I asked you earlier if you knew 8 Ken Jenne and Michael Fisten and you said yes and 9 you knew that they had an association with RRA; is 10 that correct? 11 A. Yeah, that's correct. 12 Q. And do you know whether they were 13 employees or whether they were independent 14 contractors? 15 A. You asked me that and I still have no idea. 16 Q. Did they have offices within RRA, 17 Mr. Jenne and Mr. Fisten? 18 A. They, Mr. Jenne definitely had an office 19 within RRA Mr. Platen was normally in the field and I 20 assume he had a place to go in RRA I don't know if you 21 call it an office. 22 Q. Did you ever go -- 23 A. That's it 24 Q. Did you ever go meet with him within RRA? 25 A. Yes.¶
1 Q. You have testified that investigations 2 'were done during the time, on Mr., relating to 3 Mr. Epstein during the time that you were at RRA 4 A Right. Q. My question to you is, did you -- first of 6 all did you receive written reports in addition to 7 oral reports? 8 A. From the investigators? 9 Q. Yes, sir. 10 THE WITNESS: Answer? 11 MR. SCAROL.A: Yeah. 12 THE WITNESS: The reports were — yes, I 13 did. 14 BY MR. CItITTON: 15 Q. And were the reports provided by e-mail or 16 were they provided by, in the form of a memo that 17 would be sent from the investigator to you or both? 18 A. 1,1 do not remember there being any in the . 19 form of an e-mail. Does not mean that there was not. I 20 did communicate by e-mail with other members of the firm 21 and other members of the investigative team on all cases 22 as has been my practice all along practicing law. There 23 were memos, though, that were given to me that were not 24 e-mail form that were the standard memos that I would 25 incorporate into a witness memo file.¶
1 Q. And again that would just be in your, 2 would that be in your electronic storage as well 3 in the hard copies? 4 A. The version I saw was the electron' 5 Q. So, that would be stored in the Fo 6 program? 7 A. That's correct. 8 Q. All right And again other inditicluals in 9 the firm, other lawyers in the flan might be able to 10 access that program, you just don't know? 11 A. Right. Well,* program, obviously that's 12 the program that the firit used. Now, whether they could 13 access, if you could go ad foss cases that weren't cases 14 you worked oni I reallyjust don't know. 15 Q. As an example could Mr. Fisten, on the, on 16 the Portia's:oak he access your, your file on an 17 Epstein case? 18 A. I don't know. 19 Q. If someone accessed your file, accessed 20 your electronic file, would you necessarily know 21 that? 22 A. No. 23 Q. All right So — 24 A. I don't believe so. 25 Q. It wouldn't show up that Michael Fisten,¶
- and 'Musing just as an example, is that he came in 2 or Scott Rothstein came in and looked at a 3 particular file of yours, whether it related to 4 Mr, Epstein or not, you don't know? 5 A. I can't answer that question accurately. 6 Q. Okay. Did you ever send investigative 7 reports to other lawyers regarding Mr. Epstein; that 8 is, if you got an investigative report from 9 Mr. Fisten or Mr. Jenne or whomever, would you send 10 those on to certain lawyers on a regular basis? 13. MR. SCAROLA: You can answer that 12 question. 13 THE WITNESS: No. 14 ' BY MR. CRITTON: 15 Q. (Mgt-lawyers, otherthen yourself, M% ere 16 rnicol'Vd frithiEpileincaWirinTficertirr ou 17 u_were associated with 18 (A. What do you mean by "were involved?" I guess 19 asp. 20 (15) (What, what lawyers actually worked on ta 21 (file? ilmoviMr. Berger worked on the Epstein 22 (cases, co4 23 aLn some °unlit! capacity, correct. 24 CQ) Okay: Mr. Adler I know attended 2 (Kir.gpstem's depo*ipp, correct?
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CAT—Corct Q. Did, did any other lawyers other than Mr. Adler or Mr. Berger attend any depositions? A. Your memory is going to be as good as mine there. I'm thinking. Mark Epstein's deposition was attend by Adler. Q. He went with you to New York? A. No. He didn't go with me to New York. He attended the deposition, and I also attended the deposition. Q. Both in person? A. Right. Q. Was he there for another fde or did he meet you there to specifically attend Mark Epstein's deposition? A. Coincidence that he was in New York during the, time when his deposition was being taken. Q. Any other lawyer that you can recall being at a deposition other than Adler, Berger and yourself? A. Not right now. If you remind me, I, I may remember. I don't remember right now. Q. Did other lawyers in the firm at RRA perform services on the files; that is, and by that I mean did they, were they involved in drafting¶
APP. 27¶
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND
FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA¶
CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG¶
_____
JEFFREY EBSTEIN,¶
Plaintiff,¶
vs.¶
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually,
and [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED],
individually,¶
Defendants.¶
VIDEOTAPE DEPOSITION CONT'D OF [REDACTED]¶
VOLUME II OF II¶
PAGES 110 - 250¶
(October 10th, 2013)¶
10:00 A.M. - 2:30 P.M.¶
401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1400
Fort Lauderdale, FL¶
Stenographically Reported By:
WENDY [REDACTED], RPR
Notary Public, State of Florida
Empire Legal Support, Inc.
Fort Lauderdale Office
Phone: (954)241-1010¶
EMPIRE LEGAL SUPPORT, INC.
(954) 241-1010¶
in which cases were handled while was a partner 2 at RRA. The one meeting that you had in Mr. Rothstein's 3 office with Adler and some persons unknown -- 4 5 direction at that time that certain discovery should be 6 done or tactics should be used with regard to 7 some unknown person on the phone, were you given any prosecuting the Epstein cases? as¶
8 A No.¶
9 Q (Okay) (At the meetings that - at the)¶
20 (meetings that occurred with these ers,)¶
11 (Berger,)(Adler I e present and)¶
12 (Epstein was discussed,) scovery that --)¶
13 (discovery and or invest' arding Mr) (Epstein)¶
14 ever discussed?¶
15¶
16¶
17 (that we were talking about,)¶
18¶
19 (assume (based upon the --¶
20 saw in the e-mails today_,) (that is exactly the)¶
ose of the meeting) correct?¶
22 (Exactly,,)(that was the purpose of the meeting)¶
23 MR. INDYKE: Discovery I think was the purpose 24 of the question.¶
25 MR. HADDAD: I'm sorry?¶
APP. 28¶
From: prisclin A. tlntm.nto Tot Scott Rothstein Ca Amy N. Howard; AdeRs Cabello Subject: Week's Appts Date: Sunday, July 26, 2009 5:28:14 PH¶
Monday¶
oti,s,$)¶
4¶
Tuesday¶
4S' (3:30prnSeln Conference)¶
(Brad Steven Jaffe and Ken Jenne)¶
\Wednesday¶
04¶
From: Bradley J. [REDACTED]
To: Princilla A. Nascimento
Subject: saxon
Date: Thursday, August 13, 2009 9:48:00 AM.¶
Ok, I have the keys with me to the other office. I went and tested them out last night. How soon can we get saxon over there to pick up the printer and move it?¶
Also, (ls Scott free at some point this morning to chat about Epstein?¶
[REDACTED] J. [REDACTED]
Partner
Rothetelin Rosenfeldt Adler | Attorneys at Law
Las Olas City Centre
401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1850
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
(954) 522-3458
(954) 522-8663 - facsimile
bedwards@rra-law.com¶
From: Ken Jenne
To: Scott Rothstein
Cc: Priscilla A. Nascimento; Mike Fisten
Date: Friday, October 23, 2009 11:40:23 AM¶
(Scott: The lawyers and Investigators working the Epstein matter are meeting on the 12th Floor at 2pm today to discuss where we are in the investigation. If you have a moment, I know that everyone would love for you to be there.) Ken¶
Ken Jenne
Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler
401 E Las Olas Blvd, Suite 1650
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Email: kjenne@ma-law.com
Work: 954-522-3458
Fax: 954-527-8663¶
APP. 29¶
ECO P'Y¶
No. 502009CA0408001cc'MBAG¶
(511).¶
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION¶
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,¶
Plaintiff,¶
vs.¶
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually,¶
and J. individually,¶
Defendants.¶
00 East Broward Boulevard,¶
S Thursday,(June 14, 2012¶
e'Ft. Lauderdale, Florida¶
9:14 a.m. - 12:37 p.m.¶
Of¶
(SCOTT ROTHSTEIN¶
(Via Video Conference)¶
Taken II behalf of the Trustee pursuant to a notice of taking deposition¶
Q. Please do.¶
2 A. The Ponzi scheme was running very low on 3 capital. My co-conspirators and I needed to find a 4 new feeder fund, new investment sources. We had a 5 couple of very large, significantly wealthy potential 6 investors out there. I was looking for something that 7 would have been very attractive. We had ,had a lot of 8 inquiry during the due diligence period with these 9 people that were doing due diligen n the putative 10 cases that we were selling. ' <::! h I thought about 11 the Epstein case, realizin a t was a substantial AnN ) ASS" 12 actual file in the offi ,Same up with the idea 13 that if I created a e confidential settlement 14 circling around -- based upon this actual case, they 15 would be able to ,increase the level of due diligence 16 that I was able to offer to my potential investors.¶
17 Q. 18 ow did you know this was a substantial file in yonffice at that time?¶
19 A. 20 office. Again, through the people I spoke to in the¶
21 Q. Such as who?¶
22 A. 23 Fistos. Again, same people, Adler, , Jaffe,¶
1 (interaction -2,¶
2 Sorry, Tonja, I didn't mean to speak over 3 you.¶
4 (If you talk to the people in the fin (L9¶
5 (they are honest with you)(they'll tell you my)¶
6 (interaction was far more significant with Russ Adler)¶
7 (probably more so because he was a co-conspirator of¶
8 (mine) (My interaction with Russ was far greater by¶
9 (many) many percents over my interaction with Brad) and¶
10 (then you go down the line) (rhadmore interaction¶
11 with than I with Mr)(Fistos, more¶
12 (interaction with Jaffe than.Ifainath Mr.¶
13 (and so on)¶
14 Q. Russ was the head of your tort group, right?¶
15 A. Yes.¶
16 Q. 17 that co So these cases fell under the tort group; is¶
18 'Yes, it fell under the fell under Russ'¶
19 pu iew ultimately, yes.¶
20 Q• And Brad was a partner at your firm during 21 the time these cases were there, correct?¶
22 A. I believe that was his title. He was either 23 partner or shareholder. I. don't think we had made him 24 a shareholder yet.¶
1 correct?¶
2 A. To the best of my recollection, no.¶
3 Q. So you stated that you learned this case 4 was -- I don't want to misquote you and listen to a 5 long speaking objection, but what did you call this 6 case?¶
7 MR. SCAROLA: Who wants the quot¶
8 THE WITNESS: It was a substanZ.:2 case 9 with a what I. perceived to be a ig y collectible 10 pedophile as a defendant. 11 BY MS. HADDAD: /SI)¶
12 Q. (Right) (How dicliAkhow at the time when ` 1 13 you these investors wanted to investigate and you 114 said you were going to create acfake settlement; how 115 (did you know that this case was the case that yoU 16 (could use?¶
rom talking to all the people that I Cjilip -8 (75.D2Q. Adler (Jaffe, IIIIIID(RE) 111111'0(g 9 (the extent that "(poke to him about it)¶
0 Q. (Did you speak with Mr) about the ( case?¶
2 EIL• CI (don't have aCiparric recollection one way 3 (or the others (I(remember speaking to him at least U Obriefly the day or the day of or the day before the CS actual investor's due diligence was going on as to¶
O¶
U 4 A. I'm certain that I did. I don't remember 25 which grow s I belon ed to. I never got into the full¶
1 (what was going on. (And I may have spoke to him, a a (know I(spoke to Russ (but I may have spoke to him as 0 (well within a couple of days just prior to this due: ED (diligence because I(was trying to at least get somei (information in my head that Ijcould use when.I(Wi4 @ (creating this story for the investors.¶
7 Q. Scott, what's Q-task?¶
8 A. Q-task is a web based softw e system that I 9 had invested $7 million in.¶
10 Q. And what was the pu • k this internet 11 system?¶
12 A. To be able to co AlShin icate in a secure 13 fashion ,and in a unique: group fashion about specific 14 files.¶
15 Q. So forgive me, we all know I'm not good with 16 the computer.' 4 1hat was something that would be useful 17 within w firm, why?¶
18 Because it allowed you to create groups and 19 had both general and private chats, organize data in 20 a very unique fashion. That was, at least to our way 21 of thinking, would have been very, very helpful in the 2 law firm setting with multiple practice groups.¶
3 Q. Did you belong to any groups on Q-task?¶
U 24 0 (How did you know,)(you just said you knew¶
1 A. I don't recall.¶
2 Q. Did you check?¶
3 A. I don't remember one way or the other. It 4 was insignificant to me.¶
5 (5-.) (Well,)(then explain to me) (You testified) 6 earlier that what was important to the investors to) 7 (see is that there was a(real case,)¶
8 1O ( (Yes.)¶
9 0 What did you look at or show them -- what) 10 (did you look at,)(first of all,)(to see if it was,) in 11 (fact) real case?¶
12 (knew it was a) real case.¶
13 (How did you know?)¶
14 15 (E) case. (Because 'my lawyers told me it was a) G (believed them.) real)¶
16 0 (What lawyers told you that?)¶
17 18 ai (already told you it was a mixture of Russ) 19 (mean,) G (knew it was a) real case. (M) We had all these 20 (boxes)(we had pggple really working on the file¶
210 (How do you know)--¶
22 or they were pulling a hell of a 23 (me) (Not that I didn't deserve it but scam on¶
1 (you know was working on the case?)¶
2 (the only people that I(knew for certain were, 3 working on the case was Brad and Russ Adler 4 (was doing his supervisory schtici)(T7hatever that was 5 (But other than tfiTE) CI don't know which other lawyers 6 (were assisting Mr. CI (didn't get invol-Wid—Te 7 (that level)¶
8 As far as the Ponzi scheme goes, the only 9 thing I cared about, Tonja, was being able to show the 10 investors that this case that I was utilizing to steal 11 a significant amount of money from them was a real 12 case. That's all I cared. about.¶
13 Q. That case came into your office through 14 Mr. , corrpct1 He brought it with him when he 15 came to RRA?¶
16 A. YeSc¶
17 Q. C e was lead counsel on the case, correct?¶
18 ' I assume he was lead counsel. I never 19 checke to see if he listed himself as lead counsel.¶
20 Q. Do you know if any additional complaints 21 were filed while the case was at RRA?¶
2 A. I have no idea one way or the other.¶
3 Q. Did you ever instruct, in furtherance of 4 your Ponzi scheme, Mr. or anyone in that 25 litigation group to file additional complaints?¶
APP.30¶
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO: 09-062943 07¶
RAZORBACK FUNDING, LLC, et al,¶
Plaintiffs,¶
vs.¶
SCOTT W. ROTHSTEIN, et' al,¶
Defendants.¶
DAY 1 ... AFT SESSION¶
DEPOSITIOA sy¶
•¶
DATE TAKEN: TIME: PLACE:( Ah., ay,(DFaNBUF—T2)(2011 :00 p.M. - 5:00 p.m. 99 N.E. 'Fourth Street, Miami, FL¶
-ROTHSTEIN¶
Taken on Behalf of Razorback¶
Examination of the witness taken before:¶
Terri United Reporting, Inc. 1218 Southeast Third Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316 (954)525-2221¶
United Reporting, Inc. (954) 525- 2221
¶
1 2 brought down boxes for you at a show, as to show these are the real oases?¶
3 4 5 6 A I believe that a substantial number of the boxes wore already in my office. And there were additional boxes and I did have people bring them to me. I do4 remember who brought them to me, but yes.¶
7 8 Q And do you recall Mr. Legamaro, wh d with respect to his review of those boxes of Soy?¶
9 10 11 12 13 A I recall bringing the box e t e only real recollection I have of that mee after meeting with them and bringing the b I walked out for a eCt period of time, let them otlgh the boxes, came back in, answered questio nd4i:St ha hey had and we went forward.¶
14 15 Q You-pulled-out-some-kind-of-a-flight-manifest;) do-you-recall-that?)¶
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 K) Learn. At-some-point-in-time-L-believe-it-was) either-Brad-Edwards-or-Russ-Adlor-pointed-out-to-me-that) one-of-the-pieces-of-evidence-they-were-using-in-the) actual-case-was-the-flight-manifest..) And actually-used) that-to-make-a-fairly-big-show.) f) found-that-those-most) of-the-time-in-these-cases-the-more-significant-our) underlying-investigation-was-and-the-more-tantalizing-it) 471;,)&7-;;;)fnterested-the-investors-got.) 4e-had-that) r-lr real-piece-of-evidence-and-we-used)itito-our-advantage-to) attempt-to-secure-the-investor.)¶
1 Q Did Russ help you make it more tantalizing, that
2 manifest --¶
3 A Did he help me?¶
4 Q Did he help you make it more tantalizing?¶
5 A The only way Russ would have helped me make it
6 more tantalizing was by just discussing the size of the
7 case. But other than that, no, he didn't do anything
8 that I recall during that meeting with regard to the
9 actual manifest. I did..¶
10 Q (Didn't you add some sensational names to the
11 manifest that weren't there to start with?¶
12 (A (I did. (I did.¶
13 Q (Tell us about that.¶
14 (A (There were -- I said that there were additional
15 manifests -- if I remember correctly, (I said there were
16 additional manifests that we had discovered containing
17 (Bill Clinton's name, (Prince Andrew, (all being shown
18 (flying with young girls on the plane.¶
19 Q (And do you know whether -- let me back up)
20 (The original manifests that were in evidence in
21 (the [REDACTED] I case, didn't have those names on it?¶
22 A (NO, (But it's interesting you bring that up
23 (because the way I came up with Bill Clinton and Prince
24 (Andrew was Mr. Adler and Mr. [REDACTED] both told me on
25 (different occasions that the reason the case, (when we¶
1 (were discussing the actual real case, (the reason it was
2 (becoming so, (quote, (unquote, (tasty because they had
3 (information that he had been flying Bill Clinton around
4 (and Prince Andrews around, (the piece that was missing
5 (from the real case was the connection to the young girls.¶
6 Q (the young girls) - (connection to the young girls
7 (was fiction, (it was a (lie?¶
8 (A (Not as far as Mr. (Epstein is concerned but as
9 (far as the other people are concerned) (yes).¶
10 Q Do you know whether Adler - Mr. Adler
11 or Mr. [REDACTED] injected any of that into the depositions
12 in the real case in order to assist with the Ponzi?¶
13 A I don't know -- No, no, I don't know whether
14 they did that or not. I wouldn't think they would.¶
15 Q (When you were asked) - (this morning about Brad
16 ([REDACTED] you really hesitated) (I don't know if you know
17 (you did that) (You were answering yes, no, maybe so) (On
18 (him you (really paused)¶
19 (A (On the question as whether or not he would have
20 (turned us in) (you mean?¶
21 (Q (Whether he was a player or whether he was
22 (involved and you didn't quite answer)¶
23 (A (Just because of the way I (knew Brad and
24 (socialized with him, (I (did not know that he was at that
25 (level) (There are certain people, (Barry Stone, (second he¶
1 found-out-about-it-would-have-absolutely-done-what-was
2 appropriately--- supposed-to-do-from-an-ethical
3 standpoint. And-then there-were-people-who-I would-say
4 would-never-do-that. And-then-there-are-people-in-the
5 middle. I believe-Brad-[REDACTED] is probably in the
6 middle.¶
7 Q Did you have your investigators, that be Jenne
8 and Wayne Black and Fistas investigate Epstein himself
9 and try to get evidence from Epstein --¶
10 A I didn't know --¶
11 Q -- do you have of any knowledge of that?¶
12 A No, sir.¶
13 Q Did you instruct them to file any kind of
14 pleadings in federal Court or anything like that in order
15 to help you promote the Ponzi?¶
16 A No. As far as the Epstein case is concerned,
17 Mr. Scherer, I never asked Mr. Adler or Mr. [REDACTED] or
18 anyone else associated with that case to do anything for
19 the purpose of furthering the Ponzi other than bring me
20 the boxes. That was all my creation.¶
21 Q Thank you.¶
22 I'm going to talk to you about Ted Morse a
23 little bit. You said he was one of your best friends, he
24 was one of your intercircle?¶
25 A Correct.¶
APP.31¶
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE No: 09-062943 07¶
RAZORBACK FUNDING, LLC, et al,¶
Plaintiffs,¶
vs.¶
SCOTT W. ROTHSTEIN, et al,¶
Defendants.¶
DAY 8 - AFTERNOON,¶
DEPOSITION OF (SCOTT'10(ROTHSTEIN)¶
DATE TAKEN: Wednesday, (December 21-,) (2011)¶
TIME: 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.¶
PLACE: James Federal¶
Justice 11111.,¶
99 Northeast Fourth Street¶
Miami, Florida 33124¶
0 Examination of the witness taken before:¶
Terri¶
United Repo., Inc.¶
1218 Southeast Third Avenue¶
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316¶
(954)525-2221¶
United Reporting, Inc.¶
(954) 525- 2221¶
1 Q And you've testified that among the more 2 interesting items were doctored flight manifests where 3 you had inserted prominent people who purportedly would 4 have been on the flight where Epstein supposedly did what 5 he was accused of doing?¶
6 A That's not correct.¶
7 Q Go ahead and correct me.¶
8 A The flight manifests that I show t em were 9 real flight manifests. I told them a ry about other 10 flight manifests that I have neve¶
11 Q How thick were the fli nifests?¶
12 A I don't recall.¶
13 Q (I'm trying to undaid) (I'm not going to have 14 yot go hrough all 13 boxes(but I'm trying to get —73' O, (frame of refiTtiZT) (You're talking about a flight¶
n. (manifest or flight manifests for a private jets,) right?,¶
G3 Yes: ethis is a very small document) (It max¶
a (have been one or two pages) (And I(had it specifically¶
os (set aside) either ask Mr. Adler or Mr (Edwards¶
a (isolate, ate flight manifest)¶
21 =Q So other than looking at the flight manifest for 22 Epatein's private jet, what exactly is it that they were 23 looking at in these 13 boxes?¶
24 A I have no idea. I left them alone to look at 25 the boxes for 20, 30 minutes.¶