Mr. Goldberger
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Mr. Leopold
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Mr. Leopold
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ted
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Leopold
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Roy Black
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Leopold
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Virginia Roberts
|
Contact |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Interlocutor |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. TEIN
|
Co counsel likely |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of Scott Rothstein regarding the Ponzi scheme and Epstein cases. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | Trip | Mr. Goldberger had to disrupt a vacation for the canceled hearing. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Termination of deposition due to attorney conflict. | Unknown (Transcription serv... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Five-minute recess/break taken during deposition. | Deposition room | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Legal hearing or deposition | A discussion took place regarding barcoded documents, the cost of color copies, and the intention... | Unspecified | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Legal proceeding | An argument between counsel during the questioning of a witness. Mr. Leopold objects to a questio... | N/A | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Deposition | A deposition where a witness is questioned by attorneys Mr. Tein and Mr. Goldberger, with Mr. Leo... | N/A | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Deposition | A witness is questioned by an attorney, Mr. Tein, in the presence of other attorneys, Mr. Goldber... | N/A | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Legal proceeding | A heated argument between Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold during a legal proceeding, transcribed by Cons... | N/A | View |
| 2017-07-26 | N/A | Deposition proceedings | Unknown (Transcript produce... | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Hearing | A hearing scheduled for "this morning" was canceled. | N/A | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Legal proceeding | A contentious exchange between attorneys during a deposition or hearing. Mr. Tein attempts to ask... | N/A | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Deposition | A deposition is being conducted where Mr. Tein is questioning an unnamed deponent about a photogr... | N/A | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Deposition | A contentious argument occurred during a deposition regarding the handling of photo exhibits. The... | Deposition room | View |
| 2017-07-26 | N/A | Legal Deposition | Unknown | View |
| 2009-05-22 | N/A | Court proceeding where discussions occurred regarding contact with victims, residence, and defini... | Court (implied) | View |
| 2008-07-10 | N/A | Final list of thirty-two victims provided to Mr. Goldberger via certified mail. | N/A | View |
| 2008-02-20 | N/A | Deposition of Jane Doe. | West Palm Beach, FL | View |
| 2007-01-01 | N/A | Virginia Roberts is contacted by Epstein's attorneys (Bill Riley and Goldberger). | Australia (Recipient location) | View |
| 2007-01-01 | N/A | Virginia Roberts is contacted by Epstein's attorneys (Riley/Goldberger) approximately one week af... | Australia | View |
EFTA00014144.pdf
A letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY) to Jeffrey Epstein's lawyers, Jay Lefkowitz and Roy Black, dated August 26, 2008. The letter confirms a 'final list' of 32 victims, discusses the logistics of victim notification letters, and demands confirmation of payment for Mr. Josefsberg's fees. It also explicitly warns that if Epstein breaches the Non-Prosecution Agreement, the Office intends to indict him.
EFTA00014110.pdf
A letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida to attorney Roy Black regarding Jeffrey Epstein. The letter alleges that Epstein's participation in a work release program constitutes a material breach of his Non-Prosecution Agreement, which required incarceration without community control. The U.S. Attorney demands Epstein withdraw from the program and complete his eighteen-month term of imprisonment as agreed.
EFTA00014026.pdf
This document is an email chain from December 2008 involving an Assistant U.S. Attorney and several defense attorneys (Josefsberg, Ezell, Edwards, etc.) regarding Jeffrey Epstein's work release conditions. The discussion focuses on the 'exclusionary zones' programmed into Epstein's GPS monitoring system to protect victims. The AUSA confirms, via Captain Sleeth of the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office, that while Epstein's GPS will alert if he nears a prohibited location, the specific addresses and identities of the victims will remain confidential and unknown to Epstein.
EFTA00013949.pdf
A letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office (SD FL) to Jeffrey Epstein's legal team (Lefkowitz and Black) dated August 20, 2008. The letter addresses the implementation of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, specifically the payment of fees to Special Master representative Robert Josefsberg and disputes regarding victim notification lists. The U.S. Attorney offers an ultimatum: stick to the September 2007 victim list (leaving Epstein open to prosecution for later-identified victims) or include victims known as of June 30, 2008, which would require Epstein to compensate them.
DOJ-OGR-00030312.tif
This document is a court transcript from May 22, 2009, discussing the definition of 'indirect contact' with victims, the number of victims ('several'), and whether a residential address applies to prevent contact. The court emphasizes that there should be no direct or indirect contact, specifying that indirect includes no text messages, email, Facebook, MySpace, telephone calls, or voice mails. The participants are MS. BELOHLAVEK, MR. GOLDBERGER, and THE COURT.
DOJ-OGR-00000556.jpg
This document is a transcript from a legal proceeding where an attorney argues against an allegation that Mr. Epstein authorized an investigator to drive someone off the road. The speaker contends there is no proof of this authorization and that other attorneys involved, Mr. Goldberger and Roy Black, were never questioned about the incident and do not know the investigator. The argument is made to a judge ("Your Honor") and references a prior investigation in Florida.
DOJ-OGR-00033044.jpg
This document is a page from a deposition transcript dated July 26, 2017. An attorney, Mr. Tein, questions an unnamed deponent about a photograph (marked 18-001), in which the deponent identifies themself and Tiffany Rich. Mr. Tein then characterizes Tiffany Rich as the deponent's friend from the Quarterdeck Tavern. Other attorneys, Mr. Leopold and Mr. Goldberger, are also present and interject to ensure the clarity of the record.
DOJ-OGR-00033047.jpg
This document is page 59 of a legal transcript dated July 26, 2017, from a deposition or hearing. It details a contentious exchange between attorneys, where Mr. Leopold repeatedly objects to the questioning of a female witness, arguing that she has already answered the question multiple times and is being harassed. The other attorneys, Mr. Tein and Mr. Goldberger, push back against Mr. Leopold's objections.
DOJ-OGR-00033043.jpg
This is page 55 of a deposition transcript dated July 26, 2017. Attorney Mr. Tein questions a witness about an incident at the Quarterdeck Tavern where she allegedly asked co-workers to lie and switched name tags with a friend named Tiffany to avoid people serving papers. The witness denies asking anyone to lie but admits name tags were switched, claiming it was a coincidence common among staff. Attorneys Leopold and Goldberger discuss the marking of Exhibit 18-001 and photographs.
DOJ-OGR-00033037.jpg
This document is page 49 of a deposition transcript from July 26, 2017. An attorney, Mr. Tein, questions a witness about conversations they had with their aunt concerning a lawsuit and a 'Mr. Herman'. The witness states that Tiffany Rich never had a conversation with Mr. Herman in their presence, and only answered the door before leaving.
DOJ-OGR-00033016.jpg
This document is a page from a legal deposition transcript dated July 26, 2017. It captures a tense and adversarial exchange between two attorneys, Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold, during the questioning of a witness. A third attorney, Mr. Goldberger, intervenes to clarify a procedural point amidst the escalating argument.
DOJ-OGR-00033005.jpg
Page 17 of a deposition transcript recorded by Consor & Associates. The text captures a tense procedural argument between attorneys Leopold, Tein, and Goldberger regarding a break, lateness (9 a.m. vs after 2 p.m.), and professional demeanor. Following a recess, Mr. Tein resumes questioning a witness (whose name is redacted) about the seriousness of the deposition and introduces Exhibit 31-001. The document bears a footer date of 07/26/17 and a DOJ-OGR stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00033002.jpg
This document is a page from a legal deposition transcript dated July 26, 2017. An attorney, Mr. Tein, questions a witness about a photograph from a press conference related to the witness's lawsuit, which features the witness's father, stepmother, and a Mr. Herman. The witness's attorney, Mr. Leopold, objects, leading to a procedural argument with another attorney, Mr. Goldberger, about the grounds for making objections.
DOJ-OGR-00032999.jpg
This document is a page from a deposition transcript involving attorneys Leopold, Goldberger, and Tein, dated July 26, 2017 (based on the footer stamp). The text captures a contentious exchange where Mr. Leopold defends his objections regarding 'improper foundation,' while Mr. Goldberger and Mr. Tein accuse him of wasting time and obstructing the process. Mr. Tein specifically reprimands Leopold for failing to appear earlier in the morning after a separate hearing was cancelled, allegedly breaking a prior agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00033119.jpg
This document is a page from a deposition transcript (Page 131) produced by Consor & Associates. It captures a heated exchange between attorneys Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold regarding scheduling and professional courtesy, specifically concerning someone named Jack canceling vacation plans. The argument escalates until Mr. Tein calls Mr. Leopold selfish and abruptly terminates the deposition, with Mr. Goldberger instructing to go off the record.
DOJ-OGR-00033118.jpg
This document is a page from a legal transcript dated July 26, 2017, capturing a tense exchange between Mr. Leopold and Mr. Goldberger. Mr. Goldberger is upset about a hearing that was canceled at the last minute, forcing him to disrupt a vacation, and questions the reason. Mr. Leopold denies knowing why it was canceled, speculates it relates to his own recent deposition, and offers to provide an affidavit from a Mr. Pincus to confirm his lack of knowledge.
DOJ-OGR-00033117.jpg
This document is a page from a legal transcript dated July 26, 2017. The speakers, Mr. Goldberger, Mr. Leopold, and Ms. Belohlavek from the State Attorneys Office, discuss procedural matters related to evidence, specifically barcoded documents and color copies. One speaker also expresses an intent to obtain affidavits from Mr. Pincus and Judge Stern to better understand the events of the hearing.
DOJ-OGR-00033114.jpg
This document is a page from a legal transcript dated July 26, 2017. It captures a heated argument between several individuals, primarily Mr. Tein and Mr. Leopold. Mr. Tein accuses Mr. Leopold of being a liar and an obstructionist, specifically claiming that Mr. Leopold lied in a letter to his co-counsel about being unavailable for a hearing.
DOJ-OGR-00033113.jpg
This document appears to be a transcript of a legal deposition. The discussion centers around exhibits, their marking, and preventing their removal from the room. Mr. Leopold and Mr. Tein are involved in a disagreement regarding the exhibits.
DOJ-OGR-00033112.jpg
This document is page 124 of a deposition transcript dated July 26, 2017. It captures a heated and adversarial exchange between several individuals, identified as Mr. Goldberger, Mr. Leopold, and Mr. Tein, regarding the proper procedure for copying and marking photo exhibits. The conversation is marked by frequent interruptions, personal insults, and appeals to a third party, highlighting significant conflict between the participants.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017519.jpg
This document contains pages 114-117 of a deposition transcript, likely of Scott Rothstein. The witness admits to running a Ponzi scheme where he sold fake legal settlements to investors. He utilized legitimate legal cases involving Jeffrey Epstein (specifically cases involving underage girls) as 'props' to pitch to investors, making up fictitious details about settlements. He states he did not care about the background of the victims (whether they were underage or had histories of prostitution) because the settlements were fake. He also implicates Russell Adler as a co-conspirator who provided details about plaintiffs traveling on Epstein's plane.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017518.jpg
This document is a deposition transcript (pages 110-113) from a congressional oversight file. The witness (likely Scott Rothstein based on context) admits to running a Ponzi scheme with co-conspirator Russell Adler. The testimony reveals that the 'Epstein case' was used as part of the pitch for the Ponzi scheme. The witness discusses an employee, Ms. Holmes (former federal law enforcement), who worked on Epstein cases, and Brad Edwards, an attorney whose compensation and work on the Epstein case are scrutinized.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017516.jpg
This document is a deposition transcript (pages 102-105) where a witness, likely Scott Rothstein, admits to using the 'Epstein case' as a 'fake product' to drive his Ponzi scheme. He testifies that he sold 'purportedly confidential settlements' to investors and needed to create fictions around the Epstein case to secure an influx of money. The witness confirms consulting with his co-conspirator, Russell Adler, to gain enough knowledge about the Epstein case to successfully pitch it to investors.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017514.jpg
Deposition transcript of Rothstein, who discusses his Ponzi scheme and the hiring of attorney Brad Edwards at his firm (RRA). Rothstein confirms his partner, Russell Adler, was a co-conspirator in the Ponzi scheme and recommended hiring Edwards because Edwards had a 'huge case involving a billionaire pedophile' (Epstein). Rothstein hoped the legitimate fees from the Epstein case would help him exit the Ponzi scheme during 2009.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017507.jpg
This document is a four-page condensed transcript (pages 66-69) of a deposition of Scott Rothstein. He is questioned by Ms. Haddad regarding the electronic filing of federal court cases via PACER in 2009, specifically concerning a complaint filed by attorney Brad Edwards around July 24th. Rothstein admits that while he lacks specific recollection of the filing or a July 23rd meeting, the case may have been utilized to further his Ponzi scheme. The document ends with a question regarding whether Cara Holmes was an FBI or IRS agent.
Victim List
List of thirty-two victims provided via certified mail.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity