016-02.pdf

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 1 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 12
JANE DOE NO. 2,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Pitt i'vi h+fs -- l 4 c.
Moh'oV\ fo v
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON .._ i o C o v'- kt( I"
OV'cl if ,,
-------------I
JANE DOE NO. 3,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON
-------------I
JANE DOE NO. 4,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON
-------------I
JANE DOE NO. 5, CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 2 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 12
Defendant
--------------I
JANE DOE NO. 6,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 7,
Plaintif£
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
C.M.A.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON
I
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRNJOHNSON
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON
2
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305,358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 3 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 3 of 12
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant
--------------I
JANE DOE NO. II,
Plaintiff,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 101,
Plaintiff,
CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRNJOHNSON
VS.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
_____________ __;/
JANE DOE NO. I 02, CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant
______________ /
3
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 4 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 4 of 12
PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 and JANE DOE NO. 102'S
MOTION FOR NO-CONTACT ORDER
Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 (together, the "Plaintiffs") hereby
move this Court for a No-Contact Order directed to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and, as grounds,
state as follows:
1. After investigations by the Palm Beach Police Department, the Palm Beach State
Attorney's Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the United States Attorney's Office
for the Southern District of Florida (the "USAO"), Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, in June 2008,
entered pleas of "guilty" in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach Count, Florida, to
various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of minors for prostitution and the
procurement of minors for the purposes of prostitution.
2. During the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30, 2008, Palm
Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillo ordered Defendant "not to have any contact,
direct or indirect'' with any victims. (Transcript of the Plea Conference at 20, relevant pages
attached hereto as Exhibit A). Judge Dale Pucillo went on to clarify that, by "indirect," she
meant that Defendant should not send any text messages, e-mails, Facebook contact, My Space
contact, telephone calls, voicemails, or messages through third parties to "any of these victims."
Id. Judge Dale Pucillo expressly stated that the no-contact order should apply to "all of the
victims." Id.
3. In addition, after Defendant entered into a non-prosecution agreement with the
USAO, Assistant United States Attorney Marie Villafana provided Defendant's attorneys with a
list of individuals whom the USAO had identified as victims of child sex exploitation as defined
in 18 U.S.C. § 2255 (the "USAO List"). The USAO was prepared to indict Defendant based
upon Defendant's sexual exploitation of these minor victims. It was the intent of the USAO to
place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Defendant been
4
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 WWW .podhurst.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 5 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 5 of 12
convicted at trial. Thus, upon information and belief, AUSA Marie Villafana and Mr. Michael
Tein, former counsel for Defendant, along with Mr. Jack Goldberger, who still represents
Defendant, entered into a verbal agreement at the time AUSA Villafana provided the USAO List
to them, whereby neither Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, nor his agents would have any direct or
indirect contact with the victims named on the USAO List.
4. Nevertheless, during a March 25th meeting with Defendant's counsel, Defendant's
counsel told Plaintiffs' counsel that it is Defendant's position that the no-contact order agreed to
during the state plea conference does not apply to anyone other than those three victims who
were officially part of Defendant's state plea.
5. Upon Plaintiffs' counsel seeking reassurance from Defendant's counsel that
neither Defendant nor his agents would contact victims on the USAO List, Defendant's counsel
responded that Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, would not contact any of undersigned counsel's
clients as long as Mr. Josefsberg was representing them in connection with settlement
discussions.
6. As a result, on April 17, 2009, Plaintiffs' counsel sent defense counsel a letter
requesting that Defendant provide written confirmation that neither he nor his agents will
directly or indirectly contact any of the victims represented by Plaintiffs' counsel (the "No Contact Letter") (April 17, 2009 Letter attached hereto as Exhibit B). On May 18, 2009,
Plaintiffs' counsel again requested this written confirmation (E-mail correspondence attached
hereto as Exhibit C). Despite Plaintiffs' reasonable requests, Defendant's counsel first
responded by stating that the Non-Prosecution Agreement does not prevent some form of contact
with undersigned counsel's clients. (Redacted May 18, 2009 Letter from Mr. Robert Critton is
attached hereto as Exhibit D). Defendant's counsel then sent a letter on May 21, 2009 citing the
Comment to Rule 4-4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct that states that "[p ]arties to a matter
5
Podhmst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street,. Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.co111
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 6 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 6 of 12
may communicate directly with each other." (Redacted May 21, 2009 Letter from Mr. Critton is
attached hereto as Exhibit E). Thus, despite Mr. Critton's statement that it is not Defendant's
intention to have direct contact with undersigned counsel's clients, Defendant obviously believes
he can change his intentions if he so chooses.
7. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is a designated sexual offender who sexually abused
Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 when the victims were minors. As a result of his abuse,
Plaintiffs have in the past suffered, now suffer, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical
injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental
anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self esteem, loss of dignity, and invasion of their privacy. Any further direct or indirect contact with
Defendant and/or his agents would cause a great deal of additional damages. Moreover, any
desire or need on the part of Defendant to contact these victims-implied by virtue of his refusal
to tmambiguously confirm that he will not contact them-is disturbing and suspect, at best. At a
minimum, Defendant's refusal to avoid contaet works as a ploy to attempt to keep Plaintiffs in
"victim mode."
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to enter an order prohibiting
Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and any of his agents from any direct or indirect contact with
Plaintiffs, except through Plaintiffs' attorney ofrecord through the duration of this Court's order.
Memorandum In Sugport
As previously stated, during the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30,
2008, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillo ordered Defendant "not to have any
contact, direct or indirect" with any of Defendant's victims. However, for what could only be
dubious purposes, Defendant seeks to take advantage of the fact that only three of Defendant's
numerous victims were officially a part of the State of Florida's criminal prosecution of
6
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 7 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Pa
Defendant and that he entered into a non-prosecution agreement with the USAO. Thus, despi1
the no-contact order being considered a standard condition of probation or community contrc
for sex offenders such as Defendant, and despite his counsel having agreed to a no-contact orde
with AUSA Villafana for all of Defendant's victims on the USAO List, Defendant is now takin:
the position that neither Judge Dale Pucillo's no-contact order nor his agreement with the USA(
via his counsel restricts him from contacting any of the victims except for the three victim
directly involved in the state plea. Because of the non-prosecution agreement, there is no federa
conviction against Defendant with respect to Plaintiffs and other victims on the USAO List wh<
are similarly situated and, thus, no accompanying sentencing court to issue a no-contact order
However, each of the victims on the USAO List is supposed to be in the same position as iJ
Defendant had been convicted in federal court. In crimes involving victims, at the time oJ
sentencing, a sentencing judge generally has wide discretion to order that the defendant have no
contact with the victim or victims of the crime or crimes for which the defendant is being
sentenced. Where the defendant is given a sentence of probation or community control, the no contact order can be made a condition of the defendant's supervision. The case for judicial
intervention is heightened in cases such as this one, where Defendant has sexually exploited
numerous minors. Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102, like all of the other young women
on the USAO List, were sexually abused by Defendant; any further direct contact with
Defendant and/or his agents would cause a great deal of additional damages. Previous contact by
Defendant and his agents with other victims has had a temole effect on the young women's
ability to heal the scars of Defendant's abuse. Additionally, Defendant's contacting his victims
also has the predictable effect of undermining the victims' willingness to proceed with their civil
actions against Defendant. Defendant's demonstrated use of his wealth, power, and influence
has the immediate effect of intimidating young women who have already been traumatized by
7
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.3582800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Port Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podht
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 8 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 8 of 12
his sexual exploitation. Indeed, any desire or need on the part of Defendant to contact his
victims, implied by virtue of his refusal to confirm that he will not contact them directly or
indirectly, is disturbing and suspect, at best. Plaintiffs thus ask this Court to provide the
protection and peace of mind that each of them needs.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully move this Court to enter an order granting
Plaintiffs' Motion for No-Contact Order prohibiting Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, from any
contact or communication with Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102, either directly
or indirectly, except through Plaintiffs' attorney ofrecord for the duration of the order.
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3
On May 18, 2009, undersigned counsel conferred with counsel for Defendant in a good
faith effort to resolve the issues rnised in this motion, and Defendant's counsel advised that
Defendant opposes this motion.
Date: May 22, 2009
/s/Ibbert C. Josef!'sbe.rg
Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856
Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
City National Bank Building
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, Florida 33130
(305) 358-2800
(305) 358-2382 (fax)
riosefsberg@podhurst.com
kezell(ii{podhurst.com
Attorneys/or Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. IOI
and Jane Doe No. I 02
Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that, on May 22, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document 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 attached Service List in the manner specified,
either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other
8
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 9 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 9 of 12
authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically
Notices of Electronic Filing.
9
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
Isl Robert Josefsberg
Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856
Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
City National Bank Building
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, Florida 3 313 0
(305) 358-2800
(305) 358-2382 (fax)
rjosefsberg@podhurst.com
kezell(d)podhurst.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. I OJ
and Jane Doe No. I 02
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurstcom
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 10 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 10 of 12
SERVICE LIST
JANE DOE NO. 2 v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN
Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON
United States District Court, Southern District of Florida
Robert Critton, Esq.
Michael J. Pike, Esq.
Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP
515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone: (561) 842-2820
Fax: (561) 515-3148
rcrit@~bclclaw.com
mpike@bclclaw.com
Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein
Jack Goldberger, Esq.
Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
250 Australian A venue South, Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone: (561) 659-8300
Fax: (561) 835-8691
jagesq@bellsouth.net
Co-Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein
Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq.
Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A.
250 South Australian A venue, Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone: (561) 202-6360
Fax: (561) 828-0983
ecf(mbmcereinhartlaw.com
Counsel for Co-Defendant, Sarah Kellen
Jack Scarola, Esq.
Jack P. Hill, Esq.
Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.
2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard
West Palm Beach, Florida 33409
Phone: ( 561) 686-6300
Fax: (561) 383-9456
jsx(iv,searcylaw .com
jph@searcylaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiff C.MA.
Podhurst Oz-...;cck, P.A
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.3582800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurstcom
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 11 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 11 of 12
Adam Horowitz, Esq.
Stuart Mermelstein, Esq.
Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A.
18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218
Miami, FL 3 3160
Phone: (305) 931-2200
Fax: (305) 931-0877
ahorowi tz@sexabuseattorney.com
smermelstein(msexabuseattomey .com
Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08-
80381, 08-80993, 08-80994
Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq.
Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq.
Leopold Kuvin, P.A.
2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200
Pahn Beach Gardens, FL 33410
Phone: (561) 515-1400
Fax: (561) 515-1401
sk:uvin@leopoldkuvin.com
tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com
Counsel for P la inti.ff in Related Case No. 08-08804
Richard Willits, Esq.
Richard H. Willits, P.A.
2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404
Lake Worth, FL 3 3461
Phone: (561) 582-7600
Fax: (561) 588-8819
lawyerwillits(maol.com
reelrhw@hotmail.com
Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811
Brad Edwards, Esq.
Law Office of Brad Edwards & Associates, LLC
2028 Harrison Street, Suite 202
Hollywood, FL 33020
Phone: (954) 414-8033
Fax: (954) 924-1530
bedwards@rra-Iaw.com
be@bradedwardslaw.com
Counsel for Plaintfffin Related Case No. 08-80893
11
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street,, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2362 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www .podhurst.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 12 of 31
Case 9: 08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 12 of 12
Isidro Manuel Garcia, Esq.
Garcia Elkins & Boehringer
224 Datura A venue, Suite 900
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone: (561) 832-8033
Fax: (561) 832-7137
isid.rogarcia(a),beUsouth.net
Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469
12
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhmst.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 13 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 4
EXHIBIT A
to
Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's
Motion for No-Contact Order
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 14 of 31
,Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 4
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CRIMINAL DIVISION
STATE OF FLORIDA )
)
vs )
)
JEFFREY EPSTEIN )
)
Defendant. )
___________ )
CASE NO. 06 CF9454AMB
08 938:j.CFAMB
• PLEA CONFERENCE
11 PRESIDING: HONORABLE DEBORAH DALE PUCILLO
12 APPEARANCES:
13 ON BEHALF OF THE STATE:
BARRY E. KRISCHER, ESQUIRE
14 State Attorney
401 North Dixie Highway
15 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
By: LANNA BELOHLAVEK, ESQUIRE
16 Assistant State Attorney
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT:
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS,P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
By: JACK GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE
CER1\f\EO COPY
June 30, 2008
24 Palm Beach County Courthouse
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
25 Beginning ~t 8:40 0 ' clock, a.m.
PHYLLIS A. DAMES, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 15 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 3 of 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
regularly congregate?
MS. BELOHLAVEK: I personally do not
know.
THE COURT:
why I.' m asking.
investigated?
Neither do I, which is
Has that been
20
MR. GOLDBERGER: We have done our due
diligence, for what it's worth, there is a
residential street. There are not children
congregating on that street. We think the
address applies, if it doesn't, we fully
recognize that he can't live there.
THE COURT: Okay. Dis, you shall
not have any contact with the victim, are
there more than one victim?
MS. BELOHLAVEK: There's several.
THE COURT: Several, all of the
victims. So this should be plural. I'm
making that plural. You are not to have
any contact direct or indirect, and in this
day and age I find it necessary to go over
exactly what we mean by indirect. By
indirect, we mean no text messages, no
e~mail, no Face Book, no My Space, no
telephone calls, no voice mails, no
PHYLLIS A. DAMES, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 16 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 4 of 4
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
messages through carrier pigeon, no
messages through third parties, no hey
would you tell so and so for me, no having
a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach
any of these victims with a message of any
sort from you, is that clear?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes, ma'am
THE COURT: And then it states,
unless approved by the victim, the
therapist and the sentencing court. Okay.
THE DEFENDANT: I understand.
THE COURT: And the sentencing court.
So, if there is a desire which, I would
think would be a bit strange to have
contact with any of the victims the court
must approve it.
MS. BELOHLAVEK: Correct.
THE COURT: If the victim was under
the age of 18, which was the case, you
shall not until you have successfully
attended and completed the sex offender
program. So, is this sex offender 9rogram
becoming a condition of probation?
MS. BELOHLAVEK: That is not. I
don't believe I circled that one.
PHYLLIS A. DAMES, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 17 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 4
EXHIBITB
to
Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's
Motion for No-Contact Order
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 18 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 4
Podhurst Orseck
TRIAL & APPELLATE LAWYERS
Aaron S. Podhurst
Robert C. Josefsberg
Joel D. Baton
Steven C. Marks
V!ci:or M. Diaz, Jr.
Katherine w. Ezell
Stephen F. Rosenthal
Ricardo M. Martfnez..Od
Ramon A Rasco
Alexander T. Ruru:llet
John Gravante, m
Carolina Mabarbiz
David Spicer, Esq.
11000 Prosperity Farms Road
Suite 104
Palm.Beach Gardens, FL33410
Robert Critton, Esq.
April 17, 2009
VIA FACSIMILE
Burman,, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP
515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Jack Goldberger, Esq.
Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
250 Australian A venue South, Suite I 400
West Palm Beach. FL 33401
Gentlemen:
Robert Orseck (1934-1978)
Walter H. Beckham, Jr.
KarenPodhurst Dem
Of Counsel
During om-recent meeting with Mr. Black, we were told that it is your client's position that
the no-contact order agreed to during the state plea colloquy does not apply to any of our clients
except for those victims who were part of Mr. Epstein's state plea Our understanding is that AUSA
Villafana and Messrs. Tein and Goldberger entered a verbal agreement at the time that the list of
victims was provided to those defense counsel.that Mr. Epstein, including his agents, would have·
no direct or indirect contact with the victims named on this list . In addiditon, under applicable
Florida Bar Rules governing contact by attorneys and their agents with persons represented by
counsel, any contact with any of our clients or their family members by Mr. Epstein, his counsel
and/or his agents must strictly be through us. Mr. Lefkowitz had previously reassured us that .Mr.
Epstein would not contact any of our clients as long as I am "representing them in connection with
settlement discussions." Due to om differences regarding the retroactivity issue and 1he "per
plaintiff' v. per incident/count issue, we have apparently reached a dead end regarding settlement
Podhurst ~P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33l30
Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346
www.podhurst.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 19 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 3 of 4
We are concerned that Mr. Epstein could misconstrue our impasse in conjunction with Mr.
Lefkowitz' e-mail to mean that now that we are no longer "representing them in connection with
settlement discussions," he may contact them. Please be assured that it is our position that regardless
of whether we are representing our clients during settJement discussions and/or trial preparation, we,
and the rules of professional conduct, prohibit contact.
In order to be crystal clear as to whom we represent, we have attached a list of our present
clients. We expect each member of Mr. Epstein's defense team to abide by the applicable rules of
professional conduct. We request written confirmation from Mr. Epstein that neither he nor his
agents will contact any of the victims represented by us.
If this correspondence is in any way unclear, please contact us.
Sincerely,
~~ Robert c.-Josefuberg
cc: Roy Black, Esq. w/ enclosures
Jay Lefkowitz, Esq. w/ enclosures
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 20 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 4 of 4
List of Clients Represented by Podhurst Orseck P.A.
as of April 17, 20091
1 We will supplement th.is list as necessary.
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 21 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 2
EXHIBITC
to
Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's
Motion For No-Contact Order
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 22 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-4
ROBERT C. JOSEFSBERG
From:
Sent:
ROBERT C. JOSEFSBERG •
Monday, May 18, 2009 4:46 PM
Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 1
To: 'rcrit@bclclaw.com'; 'jagesq@bellsouth.net'
Subject Epstein No Contact Letter
Importance: High
Attachments: No Contact Letter of April 17.pdf
Gentlemen:
On April 17, 2009 we sent your team the attached No Contact Letter. To date, we
have not heard back from you or any other members of Mr. Epstein's defense team.
If we don't hear back from you by Wednesday, May 20, 2009, we will seek relief in
court. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Robert C. Josefsberg
5/19/2009
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 23 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 3
EXHIBITD
to
Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's
Motion for No-Contact Order
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 24 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 3
BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER
& COLEMAN LLP
J. MICHAEL BURMAN, P.A.I
OREGORY W. COUlMAN, P.A. •
ROBERT D. CRrrroN, JR., !'.A.I
BllRNARD LBBBDBJrnR
MARKT. urrnmt, P.A.
IBPFR6Y C. PBPIN
MICHABLJ.PIKB
A LIMlTBO LIABlLJn' PARTNBRSWP
HHATimR Md'iAMARA R.UDA
I PLOllIDA BOARD ODr11f1III)
C1V1L 11UAi. LAWYllll
Katherine W. Ezell, Esq.
Robert Josefsberg, Esq.
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 Wast Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, FL 33130
Re:
Dear Kathy and Bob:
May 18, 2009
ADlltQUI J. BllNAVBNTB
l'l\RAl.SGAl./ ltlVll5TIC,ffll
.BARlJA:RA M, McKENNA
ASHLlI! STOKBN-BARINO
BBrt'Y STOK!!S PARALl!OA!.8
Rn'A H. .BIJDNYK O!'COUNS!ll.
Additionally, Bob, you wrote a letter on April 17, 2009 stating your posltiQn
regarding "No Contact' with any of your firm's clients based on your Interpretation· of the
Non-Prosecution Agreement I do not concede that your position Is correct nor that the
Non-Prosecution Agreement prevents some fonns of contact with our clients.
L•A•W•Y•H•R•S
515N.FLAGLBRDIUVE / sum!400 / WFSI'PALMBEACH,PLORIDA33401
'J13LEPHONB (561) 842-2820 FAX (561) 844-6929
mai1@bulclaw.com
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 25 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 3 of 3
May 18, 2009
Page2
RDC/clz
cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq.
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 26 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 3
EXHIBITE
to
Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's
Motion for No-Contact Order
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 27 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 3
J. MICHAEL BURMAN, P.A.1
GROOORY W. COLEMAN. PA.
ROBERT D. CRITION,JR., P.A.1
BERNARDLEBBPBKER
A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
MARK T.LUTTIBR,PA.
JEFFREY C. PEPIN
MICHAEL J. PIKE
HEATHER McNAMARA RUDA
I J'LOlUDA BOARD CllRTIPIBD
CIYlt, TJUAt. l.A WYER
Sent by E-Mail and U.S. Mail
Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq.
Katherine Ezell, Esq.
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, FL 33130
Dear Bob:
May 21, 2009
ADBLQU! J. BBNAVBN'l'E
PARALEGAL I INYESTIOATOR
BARBARA M. McKENNA
ASHLIE STOKEN-13AR!NG
BETTY STOKES
PARAU!GALS
RITA H. BUDNYK
Ol'COUNSEL
As I advised you yesterday, I am responding to your April 17, 2009 letter. As l
stated in my e-tnail, I think your request is unnecessary. Despite what Roy may have
said to you, my client has had no contact with any of your clients. To my knowledge,
the only one who has "breachedff any agreement regarding contact is your own client,
- who, as I advised you in a letter last week, contacted Jack Goldberger's
office looking for her settlement check. Mr. Goldberger, of course, did not speak with
her.
Lawyers who represent Mr. Epstein are well familiar with the Rules of
Professional Conduct, including Rule 4-4.2. At the same time, I am certain you are
equally familiar with that Rule. The Comment provides «Parties to a matter may
communicate directly with each other ... ".
To my knowledge, neither Mr. Epstein nor any attorney or agent of those
attorneys who represent Mr. Epstein, have contacted or attempted to contact your
clients. Given that it is not Mr. Epstein's Intention to have direct contact with your
clients, it is unnecessary to respond point by point to statements attributed to my co--
counsel.
L•A•W•Y•E•R•S
515 N. FLAGLER DRIVE / SUITE 400 / WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401
TELEPHONE (561) 842-2820 FAX (561) 844-6929
mail@bclclaw.oom
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 28 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 3 of 3
May 21, 2009
Page2
Rather than to be concerned about what my client is doing, I would ask that you
advise your clients not to contact Mr. Epstein's lawyers dfrectly. Neither I nor the
attorneys who represent Mr. Epstein want to be put in a position where we are set up by
any of your clients.
RDC/msc
cc: Roy Black, Esq.
Jay Lefkowitz, Esq.
J. Michael Burman, Esq.
Jack Goldberger, Esq.
Josefsberg.011.doc
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 29 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-7 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 4
JANE DOE NO. 2,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON
---------------'/
JANE DOE NO. 3,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON
-------------I
JANE DOE NO. 4,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON
---------------' I
JANE DOE NO. 5,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 30 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-7 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 4
Defendant.
--------------I
JANE DOE NO. 6,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON
_____________ ......;/
JANE DOE NO. 7,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/JOHNSON
______________ /
C.M.A.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRNJOHNSON
---------------'/
JANE DOE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRNJOHNSON
Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 31 of 31
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-7 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 3 of 4
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant
--------------I
JANE DOE NO. II,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON
--------------I
JANE DOE NO. 101,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON
--------------I
JANE DOE NO. 102,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant
CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHNSON
--------------I
0 RD ER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for No-Contact Order (DE
# _J, filed May 22, 2009. Plaintiffs represent that Defendant has not agreed to the relief