### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAJ JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Related cases: 08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092 ### THIRD PARTY WITNESS, IGOR ZINOVIEW'S, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW Third Party Witness, Igor Zinoview's, ("Mr. Zinoview") by and through his undersigned attorney, moves this Court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) for a protective order regarding his deposition and as grounds therefore would state: 1. As reflected on the affidavit of Igor Zinoview, attached as Exhibit A, he works for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Mr. Epstein') as a driver and bodyguard. He did not know Mr. Epstein before November of 2005. He first became employed by Mr. Epstein in November of 2005. 1. Additionally, Mr. Zinoview would testify as set forth on his affidavit, that at no time has he discussed with Mr. Epstein any issues involving Mr. Epstein's criminal case nor any of the cases or issues involved with civil plaintiffs. 1. In many of the depositions, counsel for L.M. and E.W., has asked them as witnesses to assume certain facts about which they have no knowledge, and he then asks their opinions about certain facts. See Exhibit B -Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions. 1. There is no information which Mr. Zinoview has relating to the facts and circumstances surrounding any of the pending civil cases, in that none of their allegations directed to Mr. Epstein extend beyond September of 2005. Therefore whatever information Mr. Zinoview may have, postdates that time. 1. Regarding the scope of discovery, Judge Linnea noted in her October 28, 2009 Omnibus Order (DE #377), "[w]hile the scope of discovery is broad, it is not without limits. Washington v. & Williamson Tobacco 959 F.2d 1566, 1570 (11th Cir. 1992). ... Courts have long held that \`[w]hile the standard of relevancy [in discovery] is a liberal one, it is not so liberal as to allow a party to roam in the shadow zones of relevancy and to explore matter (sic) which does not presently appear germane on the theory that it might conceivably become so.' Food Lion Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Intern. Union, 103 F.3d 1007, 1012-13 (CA. D.C. 1997) (string cite omitted)." 1. Rule 26(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, provides that, "[a] party or any person from whomn discovery is sought may move for a protective order in the court where the action is pending.... The court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following: (A) forbidding the disclosure or discovery;" 1. As set forth in his affidavit, Mr. Zinoview cannot possibly have any knowledge or information that is presently germane to this action. Accordingly, the Court should enter a protective order prohibiting his deposition. WHEREFORE, third-party witness moves this court for a protective order pursuant to Rule 26(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that his deposition not take place or the questioning be limited. > By: JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER ESQ. Florida Bar No. 262013 jageso@bellsouth.net # Rule 7.1 Certification I hereby certify that counsel for the movant has conferred or attempted to confer with opposing counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the filing of this motion for protective order but has been unable to do so. ### Certificate of Service I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of November, 2009 Respectfully submitted, By: JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER ESQ. Florida Bar No. 262013 iagesq@bellsouth.net Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) #### Certificate of Service Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/ stein Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Brad Adam D. Horowitz, Esq. Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A. 18205 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 2218 Miami, FL 33160 305-931-2200 Fax: 305-931-0877 ssm@sexabuseattornev.com ahorowitz@sexabuseattornev.com Counsel for Plaintiffs In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993, 08-80994 Richard Horace Willits, Esq. Richard H. Willits, P.A. 2290 10th Avenue North Suite 404 Lake Worth, FL 33461 561.582-7600 Fax: 561-588-8819 Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811 reelrhw@hotmail.com Jack Scarola, Esq. Jack P. M, Esq. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33409 561-686-6300 Fax: 561-383-9424 jsx@searevlaw.corn iph@searcvlaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A. Bruce Reinhart, Esq. Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A. 250 S. Australian Avenue Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-522-3456 Fax: 954-527-8663 bedwards©rra-law.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893 Paul G. Cassell, Esq. Pro Hac Vice 332 South 1400 E, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112 801-585-5202 801-585-6833 Fax cassellp®law.utah.edu Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe Isidro M. =, Esq. Law Firm, P.A. 224 Datum Street, Suite 900 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 561-832-7732 561-832-7137 F isidrogarcia©bellsouth.net Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469 Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 riosefsberg(podhurst.com kezell@podhurst.com Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656 Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. 561-202-6360 Fax: 561-828-0983 ecf brucereinh rtl w.com Counsel for Defendant Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq, Leopold, Kuvin, P.A. 2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 561-684-6500 Fax: 561-515-2610 skuvin@lecooldkuvin.com Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804 Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691 jaciesqlabellsouth.net Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein ## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-. JANE DOE NO. 2, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. Related Cases: 08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994, 08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469, 09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092. # AFFIDAVIT OF IGOR ZINOVIEV STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says: - 1. My name is Igor Zinoview. - 2. I began working for Mr. Epstein in November of 2005. - 3. I did not know him until I began working for him. - 4. I have never discussed nor has he ever attempted to discuss with me any facts or information relating to any legal matters in which he is involved. - 5. I work for Mr. Epstein as his driver, bodyguard and trainer. EXHIBIT A Page 2 FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. Igor noviev STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above named person: X-14/ykr Zinovh,,,o, and that an oath was/was not taken. WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of ht,, et 2009. ![](_page_6_Picture_7.jpeg) VY NAME 011 (SEAL) NOTARY PUBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA COMMLSS ON NO.: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 502008CA028051XXXXMB AB L.M., Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. ## EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER TO PROHIBIT INAPPROPRIATE DEPOSITION QUESTIONS Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), pursuant to Rule 1.280(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, moves for a protective order to prohibit argumentative, harassing and inappropriate questions in depositions, and states: 1. At numerous depositions, Plaintiffs counsel has repeatedly asked argumentative and harassing questions that are irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 1. In particular, Plaintiffs counsel has asked questions that improperly sought to illicit lay opinions from fact witnesses, asked questions regarding witnesses' feelings towards Mr. Epstein and their beliefs regarding media reports of this case, asked whether they would leave their children with Mr. Epstein and asked whether they would go back to work for Mr. Epstein assuming the media reports were accurate, among other things. These questions and the responses thereto will never be admissible. They are argumentative, irrelevant and seek speculative answers and inadmissible lay opinions. EXHIBIT LM v. Epstein Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB Epsteln's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 2 of 9 3. For example, in the deposition of Larry Visoski, one of Mr. Epstein's pilots, Plaintiffs counsel asked the following questions seeking to obtain Mr. Visoski's beliefs and opinions on Plaintiffs allegations: > Q. All right. When you read in the newspapers the allegations that Mr. Epstein was involved with numerous underage girls for sexual reasons, were you surprised? A. I didn't believe it. Q. Do you believe it today? A. I don't believe it. Q. You don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein was involved with underage girls in a sexual way? MR. CRITTON: Form. THE WITNESS: You're asking for my opinion, and I don't think my opinion is relevant in that matter. BY MR. Q. I think it's relevant. Can you just tell me whether today you believe that Jeffrey Epstein has engaged in sex with underage girls? MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation, irrelevant, always. THE WITNESS: It's irrelevant. BY MR. Q. I need an answer. A. I don't believe he had sex with underage women. Q. Or engaged in any sexual acts with underage women? MR. CRITTON: Form. 1,,M v. Epstein Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 3 of 9 THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. Q. You think that this is just a story that a bunch of underage women have made up? A. Speculation. \* * \* Q. Then we'll handle the question this way: If you were to believe based on information and evidence that Mr. Epstein engaged in sex or some form of sex acts with people of the age range of 12, 13, 14, 15 years old, would you continue your employment with Mr. Epstein? MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation. THE WITNESS: I would certainly be speculating and I have to discuss it with my wife long and hard. I don't think I could give you a correct and honest answer at this time. See Excerpts of Deposition of Larry Visokski at 66-67; 181-82 (attached as composite Exhibit A). Other examples of similar improper questions are included in Exhibit A. 4. Not only do these questions seek improper lay opinions, Plaintiffs counsel asked Mr. Visoski his belief as to the truth of hearsay newspaper articles. The foregoing questions are obviously Irrelevant, argumentative and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 1. Moreover, whether Mr. Visoski would continue working for Mr. Epstein if Plaintiff's allegations are true has absolutely no relevance to any claim or defense in this case. The questions are simply improper and meant to harass and embarrass the M vEpstein Case No. 50200BCA028051XXXXMBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 4 of 9 witness. 6. Mr. Visoski was questioned for over four hours and much of the time was wasted on irrelevant and harassing questions. 1. Plaintiff's counsel asked similar questions at the deposition of Larry Eugene a, another one of Mr. Epstein's pilots: > Q. Certainly you've read certain newspaper articles about the allegations, police reports, otherwise, the allegations that occurred or have been alleged to have occurred at his Palm Beach mansion, correct? A. Uh-huh. Q. Correct? A. Correct. Q. Given the nature of those allegations, would you leave your daughter of 17, 16, 15 years old with Mr. Epstein alone? MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. A. Yes. • * • • Q. And despite pleading guilty to procuring underage girls for the purposes of sex, you still feel comfortable leaving a 13, 14, 15-year-old girl around him? MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. A. Yes. I mean, with my daughter, yes. I don't know how he behaves around anybody else. I just know that the respect that he showed me, I feel safe with my daughter. Q. And have you read in detail the reports as to what happened at his house with the girls? ue v. Eostelq Case No. 502008CA028051XX)O(MBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 5 of 9 A. Only — MR. PIKE: Form. A. — what's been in the newspapers and published. Q. If you read and hear testimony given - well, I can tell you now - testimony has been given in this case that what happens is: A 13 or 14 year old is led upstairs by herself, told to get naked, he lays down on his back, there is a brief massage before he turns over, exposes himself erect, masturbates while he tells this 13 or 14 year old to pinch his nipples as hard as she can while he inserts his fingers into their vagina and ejaculates all over them before saying, "Take your money and leave." MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. BY MR. Q. Okay? Then, "You can continue to come back for \$200 every time or every girl you bring me within your age group and I get to do this again, I pay you \$200 per person." If that is the testimony -- MR. PIKE: Form. Q. — that what happens behind closed doors with him, do you still feel comfortable leaving a13 or 14 year old in a room with Jeffrey Epstein? MR. PIKE: Form. A. If that, in fact, is what actually happened, no. Q. [Would you] go back - considering what you've read and what you may or may not believe - would you go back to working for Jeffrey Epstein? MR. PIKE: Form. A. I can't say. I still work for him on a maintenance - to LAW v. Epstein Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 6 of 9 maintain the airplanes and stuff like that, so. See Excerpts of Deposition of Larry Eugene at 135-36; 175-76; 184 (attached as composite Exhibit B). 8. Again, whether Mr. would work for Mr. Epstein "considering what [he has] read and what [he] may or may not believe" (i.e. considering hearsay media accounts and inadmissible lay opinion) has no bearing on the instant case. 1. In addition, questions regarding whether Mr. would leave his children alone with Mr. Epstein could have only been meant to harass and embarrass Mr. Nevertheless, Mr. testified that he would leave his children with Mr. Epstein. As Plaintiffs counsel was obviously not happy with the answer to this question, he proceeded to press Mr. with inflammatory statements until he got the answer he wanted. 1. Plaintiffs counsel has also asked the same improper line of questions in other witnesses' depositions. 1. The above-cited questions exceed the bounds of permissible discovery; they have absolutely no relevance to this case. Accordingly, the Court should enter a protective order prohibiting such questions and should sanction Plaintiffs counsel if such inappropriate questions are asked at future depositions. 1. Regarding the scope of discovery, Judge Linnea noted in her October 28, 2009 Omnibus Order,' u[w]hile the scope of discovery is broad, it is not The Omnibus Order (DE #377) was entered in the federal companion case Jane Doe No. 2 v, Epstein Case No. 08-CIV-80119 MARRia in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida. LM v. Epstein Case No. 502008CAD28051X=MBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 7 of 9 without limits. Washington v. & Williamson Tobacco 959F.2d 1566, 1570 (11th Cir. 1992). ... Courts have long held that '[w]hile the standard of relevancy [in discovery] is a liberal one, it is not so liberal as to allow a party to roam in the shadow zones of relevancy and to explore matter (sic) which does not presently appear germane on the theory that it might conceivably become so.' Food Lion. Inc. V. United Food & Commercial Workers Intern. Union, 103F.3d 1007, 1012-13 (C.A. D.C. 1997) (string cite omitted)." See also Capco Properties, LLC v. Monterry Gardens of Pinecrest Condo. 982So. 2d 1211, (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (holding that discovery in civil cases must be relevant to the subject matter of the case and must be admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence) Morton Plant Hospital Ass'n, Inc. v. Shahbas, 960So. 2d 820, 824 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (holding that "discovery should be denied when it has been established that the information requested is neither relevant to any pending claim or defense nor will it lead to the discovery of admissible evidence," citing Tanchel v. Shoemaker, 928So. 2d 440, 442 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)). 13. As illustrated above, the questions are simply not germane to any pending claim or defense nor will they lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Whether Mr. Visoski believes or disbelieves the media accounts of this case, or whether Mr. would leave his children with Mr. Epstein is not relevant and cannot conceivably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 01. The Court should curtail these inappropriate lines of questions and enter a protective order prohibiting them. 01. Rule 1.280(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, provides the Court with LM v. Epstein Case No. 5020D8CA028051X\*0thilBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 8 of 9 the power to "make any order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression or undue burden or expense that justice requires including ... (4) that certain matter not be inquired into, or that the scope of the discovery be limited to certain matters." 16. Accordingly, Epstein requests the Court enter a protective order prohibiting Plaintiffs counsel from asking witnesses' questions regarding opinions and beliefs regarding media articles and the allegations in this case and whether they would leave their children with Epstein or questions of a similar nature, and limiting the scope to the witnesses personal knowledge regarding matters relevant to the claims and defenses in this case. See Shahbas, 960 So. 2d at 824. WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court enter a protective order prohibiting Plaintiffs counsel from asking witnesses' questions regarding opinions and beliefs regarding media articles and the allegations in this case and whether they would leave their children with Epstein or questions of a similar nature, and limiting the scope to the witnesses personal knowledge regarding matters relevant to the claims and defenses in this case and grant any additional relief the Court deems just and proper. ### Certificate of Service IHEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was sent by fax and U.S. Mail to the following addressees on this 3rd day of November, 2009: Brad Esq. Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler 401 East Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1650 Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 J.m v. Epstein Case No. 5O2008CA02805DOOO(MBAB Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions Page 9 of 9 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 954-522-3456 Phone 954-527-8663 Fax Counsel for Plaintiff Jay Howell, Esq. Jay Howell & Associates, P.A. 644 Cesery Boulevard Suite 250 Jacksonville, FL 32211 904-680-1234 Phone 904-680-1238 Fax Co-counsel for Plaintiff West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 Fax: 561-835-8691 Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400 West Palm Be, FL 33401 (561) 842 (561) 84 By: \[HU— Critton, Jr. F orida Bar #224162 Michael J. Pike Florida Bar #617296 (Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein) Larry Visoski October 15, 2009 |

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO. 502008CA028051XXXXXMB AD

L.M.,

-vs-

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,

Defendant.

DEPOSITION OF LARRY VISOSKI

Thursday, October 15, 2009
10:18 - 3:37 p.m.

515 N. Flagler Drive
Suite #200
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

Reported By:
Wendy Beath, [REDACTED], RPR, CRR, FPR
Notary Public, State of Florida
Esquire Deposition Services
West Palm Beach Office Job #127542

|

3

1 ...
2 INDEX
3 ...
4 ...
5 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS
6 LARRY VISOSKI
7 BY MR. [REDACTED] 6
8 BY MR. CRITTON: 214
9 BY MR. [REDACTED] 220
10 BY MR. CRITTON: 221
11 ...
12 EXHIBITS
13 ...
14 ...
15 ...
16 NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE
17 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 1 FLIGHT LOG BOOK
(MARKED IN PREVIOUS DEPO)
18
19 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 2 MESSAGE PAD 119
20 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 3 MESSAGE PAD 119
21 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 4 COMPLAINT 139
22 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 5 INMATE VISITOR LOG 161
23
24
25

| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | |

2

1 APPEARANCES:
2 On behalf of the Plaintiff:
3 [REDACTED] J. [REDACTED] ESQUIRE
4 ROTHSTEIN, ROSENFELDT, ADLER
501 East Las Olas Boulevard
Suite 1650
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33364
5
6
7 On behalf of the Defendant:
8 ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., ESQUIRE
9 BURMAN, CRITTON & LUTTIER
303 Banyan Boulevard, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
10
11 On behalf of the Witness:
12 BRUCE REINHART, ESQUIRE
250 South Australian Avenue
13 Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
14
15 ALSO PRESENT:
16 CARA L. [REDACTED] ESQUIRE
1220 N.W. 157th Avenue
17 Pembroke Pines, Florida 33028
18 ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE
MERMELSTEIN & HOROWITZ, P.A.
18205 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2218
Miami, Florida 33160
20 RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQUIRE (VIA TELEPHONE)
21 RICHARD H. WILLITS, P.A.
2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404
Lake Worth, Florida 33461
22
23
24
25

|

4

1 PROCEEDINGS
2 ...
3 Deposition taken before Wendy Beath [REDACTED]
4 Certified Realline Reporter and Notary Public in and for
5 the State of Florida at Large, in the above cause.
6 ...
7 MR. \[REDACTED\]: We're going to put something on
8 the record about -- well, we'll do it this way --
9 MR. REINHART: Do it at the end, after we get
him -- whatever you want. It's your show.
10 MR. \[REDACTED\]: Okay. There were -- I don't
11 even think Mr. Willits is aware of this. There was
12 a subpoena duces tecum for this witness, as well as
13 the previous witness, which was another pilot, Dave
14 Rogers, and that duces tecum was to bring the
15 flight logs related from 1998 through 2005. What
16 was produced at the previous deposition were flight
17 logs from 2002 through 2005, and now Mr. Reinhart
18 has agreed to produce the remainder of the flight
19 logs requested, those going from 1998 through 2002.
20 MR. REINHART: Correct. They're pilot logs,
21 not flight logs. There are other records we
22 indicated are corporate records, and with those you
23 have to deal with Mr. Critton.
24 MR. CRITTON: However, with the proviso, too,
25

| ![](_page_16_Picture_10.jpeg) 67 66 1 Q. All right. When you read in the newspapers 2 the allegations that Mr. Epstein was involved with 3 numerous underage girls for sexual reasons, were you 4 surprised? 5 A. I didn't believe it. 6 Q. Do you believe it today? 7 A. I don't believe it. 8 Q. You don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein was 9 involved with underage girls in a sexual way? 10 MR. CRITTON: Form. 11 THE WITNESS: You're asking for my opinion, 12 and I don't think my opinion Is relevant In that 13 matter. 14 BY MR. 15 Q. I think It's relevant Can you just tell me 1.6 whether today you believe that Jeffrey Epstein has 17 engaged in sex with underage girls? 18 MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation, Irrelevant, 19 always. 20 THE WITNESS: It's Irrelevant. 21 BY MR. 22 Q. I need an answer. 23 A. I don't believe he had sex with underage 24 women. 25 0. Or engaged in any sexual acts with underage women? MR. CRITTON: Form. I THE WITNESS: No. BY MRIMS: O. You think that this Is Just a story that a 6 bunch of underage women have made up? 7 A. Speculation. • 8 MR. CRITTON: Objection. Now It's 9 argumentative. Who gives a dam what he thinks one :0 way or snot r7 f he has personal knowledge - MR : You're objecting to the form? j2 MR. CRITTON: It's argumentative. 13 MRIIMI: You're objecting to the form? ll a MR. CRITTON: Yes. .16 BY MR 15 Ma r: Okay. 17 O, Is that something that you believe that a 18 bunch of women — some of which know each other, some 19'. don't some of which have been on the airplane and some 20 wtach haven't — made this up, that Jeffrey Epstein 21 engaged in some sexual conduct with them? MR. CRITTON: Form. THE WITNESS: What I believe doesn't matter In this case, does it? 68 BY MR.IMI: 2 O. I need an answer. Do you believe it? Do you 3 believe these girls made this up? 4 MR. CRITTON: Form. 5 MR. REINHART: I'm going to instruct him not 6 to answer. Move on. 7 MR.-: Is there a privilege that we're 8 asserting? 9 MR. REINHART: No, It's irrelevant. It's 10 harassment and not likely to lead to discoverable 11 evidence. 12 MR.—: I'm going to-put on the record IS right now that it is — we we allowed discovery 14 into a RICO count. We are also allowed discovery 15 into the intent of Mr. Epstein In developing a 16 criminal enterprise designed to sexually exploit 17 and sexually abuse underage girls. We beHave that 18 In doing so, he associated Intentionally with 19 people of similar beliefs that sex with underage 20 gkb is okay, and that there have been many 21 discussions with this witness, as well as many 22 other witnesses with -- to Insure his protection 23 from law enforcement that they not answer these 24 specific questions. And thus, the opinions and 25 beliefs of all of these witnesses that we are alleging associated with this criminal enterprise are certainly reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. And If you're still instructing the witness, based on that proffer, not to answer any of these questions, rm going to continue to ask the questions and you can instruct him not to answer and we can go to the Court. MR. REINHART: My response is to his opinion whether people making allegations in this case are colluding or making up astory is irrelevant to what you just said. So 1 am going to instruct him not to answer any question that goes to his opinion of someone else's motivation or the truth of facts to which he has no knowledge. So yes, I'm instructing him not to answer, MR. CRITTON: Let me add in my pad, is that I think — you're certainly not only capable to ask questions with regard to what his personal knowledge is, and If he knows something or he has reasonable basis for it; certainly you are entitled to that information. I think yotNe asked those questions and he's given you straightforward answers as to what he knew or what he didn't know under those circumstances. And as to what his A. It's an °0nion. and I believe that he has not. O. Okay. Isn't It true that at some point in lime you }earned that Jeffrey Epstein has — strike that. MR. CRITTON: When you uflimately get to a good place to break, will you let us know"? aMR.-: Let's break now. (A teak was had at 11:28 a.m.) BY MR. Q. Ph right. Eighteen years of being a pilot for Jeffrey Epstein and In terms of being able to name somebody that you %cold say you've observed w1h Jeffrey Epstein and maid classify that person as Jeffrey Epstein's friend, can you name anybody? A Nadia, Sarah; Just people that we see routinely on this airplane. Q. That's people you see routinely In the last Me to ten years, right? A. Yes. Q. Prior to that time, anybody that you've noticed as Jeffrey Epstein's friend may be Ghislaine Maxwell? A. What time frame? Q. Is that a person Nat at some point In time thoughts are on something which he has no factual basis or even an assumption to know one way or another is irrelevant. That's ultimately for a fact-finder in this case. S While it's interesting, it's argumentative and I don't think he's — I mean, do It on a question-by-question basis. If he has knowledge, that's great, but to argue your case with this witness or any other witness doesn't serve a purpose and I think Is, you know — I think not a good use of our time, I'll put it that way. But you know, you can go ahead and ask. MR. I can ask the question and It the witness is being Instructed not to answer, we'll let a judge decide whether he needs to answer the question and whether B's discoverable or not. MR. REINHART: Absolutely. Make your record. BY MR. EIM O. Do you have any reason to believe that Jeffrey Epstein engaged in sexual activity with underage women? A. I have no reason to believe. O. Okay. So es you sit here today, based on your 18 years of knowledge, experience and observation of Jeffrey Epstein. Is It your belief that he has not had sex or engaged in sexual activity valh underage women? you 'mid classify as Jeffrey Epstein's friend? A. I would classify il. I donl know If It's true. O. But Mars only because they were on the airplane together? k yes. O. Do you know Mat Jeffrey Epstein does for a BWing in yots 18 years of observing and talking wth Jeffrey Epstein? A. No. O. No Idea? A. No. O. Ever asked him? A. No, actually. Q. Ever been curious? A. Sure. O. Everdone anything to satisfy that curiosity? A. If you mean Googie It. not really, actually. I mean. I really have not. zo Q. Okay. So in 18 years of Iraveang and being the plot and driving and taking this person. Jeffrey Epstein, from one property in New York to New Mexico and Florida and around the world, you have no idea what he does in terms of how he makes money? A. No, sir. mr••••••••••••flel" %Puler INNOrl:11.4. we. • .3 f. MR. CRITTON: Form. THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. Q. If you had been aware that Mr. Epstein was end by this — this is more In the form of a hypothetical, and that I'm not going.to suggest to you It's a feet that he was. But If you had been aware that every single day Jeffrey Epstein's goal was to locate underage girls (or the purposes of sex, and either have sex with them on the airplane or at some other designation that you were destination that you were traveling him to. would you have continued to pilot those planes? AT MR. CRITTON: Form. THE WITNESS: You said It was hypothetical? BY MR. O. Ill itothellical, A. Why would I want to answer that? Because you're being hypothetical. Imean, It would obviously ;3 be wrong. \:4 Q. Sure. Well, a hypothetical question la a IS legal question that I'm allowed to ask. A. Okay. Q. And I'm just asking you if you did have knovAedge that Jeffrey Epstein was having sex with little girls either on No plane or al a place that you van taking him to or from on adaily basis, that's what he did, would you have continued to be his OW MR. CRITTON: Lel me °Neal Object to the oform. It's argumentative. II has no more value than assuming he was chopping up bodies or anybody was chopping up bodies in the plane you're lyng. I What difference does it make? Form, MR. MN What difference does II make in a case about him having sex with little girls? I'm not going to argue with you about it. YouNre staled your objection. MR. CRITTON: Exactly. It's an argumentative question. la MR. I'm not going to argue with you about it MR. CRITTON: You're arguing with htm about MR. MID No, I'm asking him the hypothetical. BY MR...111 Q. Can you answer that? Would you have continua to be a pilot for somebody who's traveling to and from destinations with the goal of having sex with underage girls? MR. CRITTON: Form. THE WITNESS: It could be any person. It doesn't have to be Jeffrey Epstein, then, right? BY MR-: O. True. A. No, I wouldn't pilot an airplane It there was wrongdoing going on. Q. That you knew about? A. That I knew you about, sure. Q. Me reading this complaiM to you, is Ws the first time you've heard these allegations — A. Yes. Q. — against Mr. Epstein? A. Yes. , which he pied guilty tO - MR. CRITTON: Form. MR. FtEINHART: Can we — for purposes of your ohypothetical, whet facts do you want him to assume are true? You said the facts to which he pled guilty, but the witness shady said he doesn't know what he pled guilty to. He knows the charge he doesn't know the facts. SY MR. Q. SoSchation of prostitution of a mince, somebody under the age of 78. MR. That's the charge, right, solicitation of prostitution of a ritkicir? MR. CRITTON: No. I think you've got h wrong. III object to the form. MR. Okay. BY PAR. Is CL Then wait handle the question this way If you were to believe based on information and evidence that Mr. Epstein engaged in sex or some Conn of sex act with people of the age range of 12, 13, 14,13 years oil, would you continue your employment with 1W. Epstein? MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation. THE WITNESS: I would certainly be speculating 182' and I have to discuss it with my wife long and • hard. I don't think I could give you a correct and honest answer at this time. BY MR. MM. O. OiTiy76W1 the negations that have been made in this case, Is this something that you have discussed with anyone other then your attorney? A. No, not really. Only from the fact that lheyre allegations and there's ski® a lot more work, I'm sure, to be discovered. MR. CRITTON: Let me put on there, for the -- If this deposition IA not typed — end we request t — I'd like at least this portion where Mr. last question back about five pages worth, so Just If you could mark it from this page back about five pages. If nobody requests the deposition, rd just like those five pages. MR. I'm going to request the deposition. so... MR. CRITTON: Okay. We'll mark this then, so you could tell me where it Is, approximately. BY MR. Q. Is I LIPeason r why you have not discussed with Jeffrey Epstein the allegations that have been m. 1 IN TH1 CIRCUIT COURT OF MC 15211 JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN MD rat PALM BEACH COUNT?, MON\* VOLUME I rages 1 to 200 2 3 3 APPEARANCE Cr COUNSEL On behalf ohne Defendant ATERBURY, GOLDBERGER 8: WEISS BY: JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER. ESO.. 4 250 Auslreien Avenue 1.14., S Sues 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Plaintiff, 6 501-659-6300 Isoldbergergeowpa.com Case No. 502001CR02•031 ZOOM AO On beta MON Defendant by telephone: Ha/IRV 1P271114, Defendant. 14 9 BURMAN. CRITrON. LUTTIER & COLEMAN BY: MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESO.. 515 N. Moist Drive 10 Sues 400 C6POSIT1 Weal Palm Belch, FL 33401 MART tlKallt 11 561442-2520 01 DZIOJO or TM PIAINTIIT October 4, 2002inpkerricidaw.com 10:55 a... - 2:20 p.m. 12 13 5/ 5 N. tinier Drive On berme of the renew Meet Palo Mach, IL 33401-021 11 LAW OFFICE OF BRUCE E. REINHART 15 BY: BRUCE E. REINHART, ESO.. One Cleadeka Cans 16 250 S. Auatnian Avenue Jennifer Olio 000000 court reporter Sub 1400 17 West PRIM Beach, FL 33401 651.2024300 10 BRelnharlafIroceREInSartLew tom 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 4 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL 1 INDEX OF EXAMINATION 2 3 on boa be Plaraf1-14; AttER 2 3 WITNESS: • 41 LARRY EUGENE 101East Les OW liodevard Page \$ aid 100 FONLeuderdei. FL 33394 95.6224450 6 DIRECT By Mr. \$5 rcs:=4ew.com 7 I On sena of Pokes Aro On 2 0140u9b a CROSS-EXAMINATION By Ms. Ezell e190 CROSS-EXAMINATION MERMELITTEIN I WIROY412, PA By Mr. Willits 6195 10BT JESSICA 0. ARBOUR. ATTORNEY.AT-LAW. 10 18205 Blecayne OPirterd UM 2210CROSS-EXAMINATION ISLA FL 33100 11 By Mr. Pike 0196 It 305431420012 FUR IRECT EXAMINATION 13 Kinx4reseatosoliortnrysom ByMr.s #199 14On b o9na1PBwW. Jena Deo 101 and 102 by 13 lelecelow 11 is - - 16 DOOPLAIST ORRICK. PA ay tune:MEsr. EZELL, ATTORNEYATLAW. IS 25V/. Fier Steel 16 INDEX TO Exmierrs Mice FL \$5130 17 18 10 305-334-2000 It•teletP1STO-2018 18 Pialnitff a Exhibit Description Page On Wolk( B. swot CAut by IslephoMc 19 1 Twenty-lour pages of \*JEGE, Inc., 20Passenger Manliest\* \*134 21 LAW OFFICE OFRICHARD WILUTS. PA MI ROAN/ WILLITS, M.. 2290 10M Avenue It 20 21 32Sole 404 22 Lako Wale, PI 33401 23 33 661.502.1800 linenrelllseecloan 24 • (Plaintiffs Composite I was attached to the 24original transcript and copies of the transcript) 3625 135 - A I have no Idea. I don't know. 2 O. When you say tha was Just 3 contra in the icture what's your understanding as to 4 is relative to Mr. Epstein? 5 A. I don't know. I don't understand. I 6 don't know. I didn't know If maybe she was like an 7 exchange — Jeffrey alleys aPPeared to be very 8 Involved in education and philanthropy. I didn't 9 know if she was an exchange-type student or something 10 or what. I don't know. 11 Q. When you say he appeared to be Involved In," 12 what do you mean? 13 A. Educational things, foundations, science 14 foundations, and things. 15 O. Speaking of - the Florida Science Foundation 16 Is a plow v.here, when he wes on work release, he spent a 17 lot of lime there, you're aware of that? - A. That's whet Na heard, yeah. 19 O. whet does that place do? 20 it I have no idea. 21 O. Does It do anything? 22 A I don't know. I don't know anything about 23 h. 24 O. Certainly you've read certain newspaper 25 articles about the allegations, police reports, 136 - otherwise, the allegations that occurred or haw been 2 alleged to have occurred at his Palm Beach mansion, 3 correct? 4 A. Uh-huh. 5 O. Correct? 6 A. Correct. 7 0. Given the nature of those allegations, would 8 you leave your daughter of 17, 10, 15 years ofd with Mr. 9 Epstein alone? 10 MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. 11 A. Yes. 12 0. You would? 13 A. (Witness nods head.) 14 O. And why? 15 A. Because I don't fear that he would fry 16 anything WO my daughter. Ho showed — When I 17 worked for him he showed me respect. He never — I - 18 never— He never showed me disrespect. He would ask 19 how the family Is. I mean, not on a personal level, 20 but en employerfemployee. 21 O. Right. Okay. 22 A. He never showed me any reason not to trust 23 him. 24 O. But you're not a 13-year old girl, so. 25 A. No, bul, like I say, he never showed me Q. And despite pleading guilty to procuring underage tills for the purposes of sex, you stir feel comfortable leaving a 13, 14,15-year-old girl around I him? MR. PEE: Form. Move to 31f5t5. A. Yes. I mean, vAlh my daughter, yes. I don't know how he behaves around anybody else. I just know that the respect that he showed me, I feel safe with my daughter. Q. And have you read In detail the reports as to what happened at his house with the girls? A. Only - MR. PIKE: Form. A. —what's been in the newspapers and published. Q. If you read and hear testimony given -well, I can tell you now -testimony has been given In this case 19. that what happens Is: A 13 or 14 year old Is led upstairs by herself, told to get naked, he lays down on his back, there Is a brief massage before he turns over, exposes himself erect, masturbates while he tens this 13 or 14 year old to pinch his nipples as hard as she can while he Inserts his fingers into their vagina and ejaculates all over them before saying, "Take your money and leave." MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike. BY MR. Q. Okay? Then, 'You can continue to come back for \$200 every time or every girl you bring me within your age group and I get to do this again, I pay you \$200 per parson.' If that is the testimony MR. PIKE Form. Q. — that what happens behind closed doors with him, do you still feel comforlable leaving a13 or 14 year old In a room with Jeffrey Epstein? MR. PIKE: Form. A. If that, in fact, Is what actually happened, no. 184 1 you witnessed Jeffrey Epstein committing? 2 A No. 3 Q. Would you — 4 A. No. 5 O. - go back - considering what you've read and 6 what you may or may not believe- would you go bad( to 7 working for Jeffrey Epstein? a MR. PIKE: Form. 9 A. I cant say. I still work for him on a 10 maintenance -to maintain the airplanes and stuff 11 like Thal, so. 12 Q. You're on his payrolr? 13 A. Salaried, yes. 0. Do you know who else is on his payroll? 15 A. Well, Dave and Larry. 16 Q. Certainly, if I want to know more about his 17 private life - do yoti know who's at his house? 18 A. No. 19 0. Do you know who his housekeeper Is? 20 A No. 21 Q. Do you know who hls architect is? 22 A. No, no. 23 0. Does Larry visit him at his house? 24 A. I would assume so. 25 Q. Why do you say you would assume so? •Thal