EFTA01130733

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, vs. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, and L.M., individually, Defendant, NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT IN SUPPLEMENTAL SUPPORT OF BRADLEY EDWARDS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendant/Counterplaintiff, BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby gives notice of the filing of the transcript of the deposition of Scott Rothstein taken on June 14, 2012. Specific portions of the deposition on which Mr. Edwards' relies in support of his motion for sununary judgment are highlighted. I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by 1-10 U.S. Mail to all counsel on the attached lis day of June 2012. RO A ar No.: 169440 Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. 9 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard est Palm Beach. Florida 33409 Attorneys for Bradley J. Edwards EFTA01130733 Edwards adv. Epstein Case No.: 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG Notice ofFiling Transcript In Supplemental Support of Bradley Edwards' Motion for Summary Judgment Page 2 of 2 COUNSEL LIST Bradley J. Edwards, Esquire Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400 West Palm Beach FL 33401 Marc S. Nurik, Esquire One E Broward Blvd., Suite 700 iierdale FL Toot Haddad Coleman, Esquire Law Offices of Tonja Haddad, P.A. 524 S Andrews Avenue, Suite 200N Fort Lauderdale. FL 01 Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esquire The L-S Law Firm 1441 Brickell Avenue, 15th Floor Miami, FL 33131 EFTA01130734 Page 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, vs. No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Defendants. 500 East Broward Boulevard, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida Thursday, June 14, 2012 9:14 a.m. - 12:37 p.m. DEPOSITION Of SCOTT ROTHSTEIN (Via Video Conference) Taken on behalf of the Trustee pursuant to a notice of taking deposition - - - FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 5ed93085-0554-4471•bcdd-ca2d81e841d1 EFTA01130735 APPEARANCES: 1 Thereupon: 2 LAW OFFICES OF IOWA HADDAD, P.A. by 2 SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, 3 Tonja Haddad, Esq. 3 was called as a witness and, having been duly sworn, Attorney for the Plaintiff. , 4 was examined and testified as follows: 4 5 AT'fERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A., by 5 THE WITNESS: I do. Jack Goldberger, Esq. 6 MS. HADDAD: Good morning, Scott. How are 6 Attorney for the Plaintiff. 7 you? SEARCY DENNEY SCAROLA ET AL, by 8 THE WITNESS: Good morning, Tonja. How are 8 Jack Scuola. Esq. you? Attorney for the Defendant, Brad Edwards 10 MS. HADDAD: Fine, thank you. It's nice to 9 10 MARC NUIUK, PA , by 11 see you. Marc Nurik, Esµ 12 THE WITNESS: Good to see you, too. 11 Attorney for Scott Rothstein 13 MR. SCAROLA: Mr. Rothstein, I don't know (Appearing via Video Conference.) 14 that you and I have met. I'm Jack Scarola, I'm 12 13 U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, by 15 representing Brad Edwards and I know you know Brad Laurence LaVecchio, Esq. 16 who's to my immediate left. 14 Attorney for the Department of Justice 27 THE WITNESS: Hey, Brad, how are you? 15 16 18 Jack, good to see you. 17 19 MR. SCAROLA: Thank you. 18 20 MR. GOLDBERGER: Also present is another 19 20 21 Jack, Jack Goldberga, and I also represent Jeffrey 21 22 Epstein. To my right is Darryn Indyke -- 22 23 THE WITNESS: Good morning, Jack. 23 24 24 MR. GOLDBERGER: How are you today? 25 25 And to my right is Darryn Indyke, who is Page 2 Page 4 I INDEX 1 Mr. Epstein's in-house counsel. 2 WITNESS DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 2 MR. INDYKE: Good morning. 3 3 THE WITNESS: Good morning, sir. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN 4 MR. NORA: Good morning, everyone. 4 5 (By Ms. Haddad) 5 MR. GOLDBERGER: Hi, Marc, how are you? 5 (By Mr. Goldberger) 92 6 MR. NURIK: Good. You'll be seeing my (By Mr. Scarola) 121 7 shoulder most of the day. 6 8 W. GOLDBERGER: Okay. 7 EXHIBITS 9 DIRECT EXAMINATION 8 10 BY MS. HADDAD: PLAINTIFFS FOR IDENTIFICATION 11 Q. Well, Scott, J know you've talked about this 9 12 probably more than you even care to, but I'd like to 10 I 64 2 69 13 start a little bit asking you about the scheme at your 11 3 72 14 firm and how and when it started and things of that 12 15 nature just very briefly because I know you've covered 13 16 19 it many times. 15 17 MR. SCAROLA: It has been covered and 16 18 protocol precludes asking questions that have already 17 19 been answered and covering areas that have already 18 19 20 been covered, so we do object. 70 21 MR. GOLDBERGER: Your objection is noted. 21 22 BY MS. HADDAD: 72 23 Q. When did this first start? 23 74 24 A. It started back in '05, '06. The question 25 25 is a little bit vague for me because it started in a Page 3 Page 5 "Mk 2 (Pages 2 to 5) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 6•0930864564-44Mbedd-ca201s9410 EFTA01130736 1 different form than it ended because it started as 1 growth started," do you mean both the scheme — do you 2 bridge loans and things of that nature, and then ". 2 mean the scheme and the firm or either one or both? 3 morphed into the Ponzi scheme. But you are looking 3 A. Both. 4 back into the 2005 time frame for the very beginning. 45 Q. Do you recall approximately when you took 5 Q. The 2005 time frame, that's when the bridge the space in the 401 Building? 6 loans started? 6 A. 1 do not. 7 A. I can't be certain exactly what we were Q. At the time everything imploded, how many 7 8 doing. I need to see all the documents to tell you partners did you have at the firm, do you recall? 9 what we were doing at what specific point in time. A. Are you saying partners and shareholders? 10 Q. What made you decide to start doing this? 10 Because remember, we had both, two designations. 11 A. ! started doing it out of greed and the need 11 Q. 1 want to start with just attorneys that 12 to support the law firm, which was having significant 12 had — not in your firm name but named as "partner' on 13 financial trouble at the time. 13 the cards, for example. 14 Q. And in 2005 had you moved over to 401 yet or 14 A. I'd have to see a list of all the employees. 15 were you still in the building where Colonial Bank 15 We had a bunch. 16 was? 16 Q. Do you recall about how many attorneys you 17 A. I don't remember. 17 had working there? 18 Q. Do you recall approximately how many 18 A. Approximately 70. 19 attorneys you had working for you when it started? 19 Q. In the year before, do you recall how many 20 A. 1 do not. Between five and ten, Tonja. 20 you had? 21 Q. Was it before you started acquiring 21 A. I do not. 22 attorneys like you were acquiring cars and watches? 22 Q. So how many equity manners did you have or 23 MR. SCAROLA: Object to the form of the 23 sha Ss? I'm not sure of the word that we are 24 question, vague. 24 using. 25 THE WITNESS: Yes. 25 A. Actual shareholders, equity shareholders Page 6 Page 8 1 BY MS. HADDAD: 1 were two, me and Stu Rosenfelt 2 Q. Well, who were you partners with when it 2 Q. And everyone else was just a partner for 3 first started? 3 title purposes? 4 A. Stu Rosenfeldt. 4 A. There were shareholders for title purposes 5 Q. Okay. Anyone else? 5 and partners for title purposes. 6 A. Susan Dolin, I believe. It was definitely 6 Q. If someone was called a shareholder for 7 Stu Rosenfeldt, Michael Fancier, and Susan Dolin may 7 title purposes then, did they get to receive any of 8 have been partners of ours at that time, I'm not 8 the funds? Were they shareholders receiving money or 9 certain. 9 they were not considered shareholders in that sense? 10 Q. Because if memory serves me correctly, you 10 MR. SCAROLA: Objection to the form of the 11 went from being in the One Financial Plaza Building to 11 question. 12 the building across the street, it was Rothstein, 12 THE WITNESS: What kind of funds are you 13 Rosenfeldt, Dolin and Pancier; is that correct? 13 talking about? 14 A. Yes. 14 BY MS. HADDAD: 15 Q. And it was some time later that you moved 15 Q. In general from the firm. When you say 16 into the 401 Building, correct? 16 equity shareholders, I understand that's you and Stu. 17 A. You are skipping one step. I went from One 17 What I'm saying is, if you had someone else that was 18 Financial Plaza to Phillips, Eisinger, Koss, Kusnick, 18 named as a shareholder, why did you call them a 19 Rothstein and Rosenfeldt. Then Stu Rosenfeld% and 1 19 shareholder as opposed to a partner? 20 broke off and formed Rothstein Rosenfeldt. And then 20 A. It was a title of prestige and achievement,. 21 Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Dolin, Fancier over at the 21 Q. So it was basically an ego thing, it had 22 Colonial Bank Building. And then we took the space in 22 nothing really to do with the finances or hierarchy of 23 the 401 Building and eventually moved over there and 23 the firm? 24 that's when the real growth started. 24 A. They got paid more generally, but it did not 25 Q. And when you say, "that's when the real 25 have anything to do with distributions. Page 7 Page 9 3 (Pages 6 to 9) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 Sed93085.0554.447f.bcdd-ca2d8te947d1 EFTA01130737 1 Q. When you were hiring and bringing in all 1 Q. Would you need to look at someone's book of 2 these new attorneys, did everyone come in as a 2 business if they were coming in just solely to be a 3 partner? 3 rainmaker for the firm prior to hiring them? 4 A. No. 4 A. I discussed it with them. There were not 5 Q. How did you decide who came in as a partner many people that I recall that I actually looked at 6 and who came in as an associate? their numbers. Once David Boden was working for me I I 756 7 A. Depended upon their level of expertise, had him check people's numbers, but I rarely looked. I 8 practice, book of business. It was a decision Stuart 8 took most people's words for what they were 9 and 1 made together on a case-by-case basis. 9 generating. 10 Q. So you and Stu where the -- were in charge 10 Q. My recollection is, you were always looking 11 of hiring? 11 to bring in more people, to hire more people, some of 2 A. Stuart and I tried to consult on every 12 us were somehow able to resist you while others were 13 hiring decision, yes. 13 not. How would you decide who you were looking at to I. 4 Q. Did you guys also decide salaries? 14 bring into your firm? 15 A. I generally decided the salary and then let 15 A. We were trying to develop, on the legitimate 16 Stu know what I was going to do. And he would say if 16 side of the law firm, we were trying to develop real 17 he thought it was okay or if he thought it was too 17 talent, real ractice groups. I mean, Brad is a 18 much or too little, but I generally had free reign in 18 perfect exampleareat lawyer, got a great reputation, 19 that regard. 19 You know, it was our hope that, you know, he was going 20 Q. Did someone's book of business directly 20 tobe one of the people to actually in some ways 21 correlate to the salary that you would offer? 21 rescue the firm because he had a practice group that 22 A. That is a very broad question because it 22 could generate substantial income. You know, on the 23 depends upon what other needs we had for that 23 legitimate side that's what we were trying to do. we 24 individual. 24 were trying to find the best and the brightest. 25 Q. What do you mean by "what other needs"? 25 Q. Okay. With respect to bringing people that Page 10 Page 12 1 A. Well, I'll give you a good example. My 1 you thought could hring_a book of bulinesscou just 2 lawyer, Mr. Nurik, his salary was directly related to 2 said Brad, for example, that he had a legitimate 3 the fact that he was a great lawyer and had a solid 3 practice_maro witILagoraLhoolcalusifl did 4 book of business. 4 you know that? 5 Q. Yes. 5 A. Everyone in the tort world that I had spoke 6 A. David Boden, on the other hand, was, as I 6 to spoke extremelylighlv_offirad not only neonle I 7 previously testified, I don't know if you've had a 7 already had working forme but other People that knew 8 chance to read the testimony, but David Boden was not 8 rim. He was very -- came very highly recommended to 9 only the general counsel to the law finn but he was 9 us. 10 also — acted as my consigliere in a significant 10 Q. Like who, for example? 11 number of illegal operations and he was compensated 11 A. We wanted him in there. We were trying to 12 significantly for that, if that helps you understand 12 develop a significant tort group and we thought that 13 the difference. 13 he'd be a great part of it. I4 Q. It does. 14 Q. Who besides Russ told you that about Brad? 15 So, for example, when you were hiring former 15 A. It would have been other people in the ton 16 judges, let's use that as an example, Pedro and Julio, 16 group. I don't want to guess, Tonja, as to which 17 clearly they don't have a book of business coming in 17 other people told me, but it was -- well more than 18 because they haven't had clients, but they may carry 18 Russ. 19 some sort of prestige or give some legitimacy, if you 19 Q. Was it people within — 70 will, to the firm. How would you decide the salary 20 A. Might have been people in politics that I 21 for someone like that? 21 talked to that knew him because we had significant 12 A. Stu and l would discuss it. It was more a 22 input at the gubernatorial level with regard to tort 3 market issue than anything else, how much arc judges 23 reform and the like, and there were people there who 24 coming off the bench getting, how much business do we 24 knew who Brad was. It was more than one person that 25 think they can generate. 25 told us that. Page 11 Page 13 4 (Pages 10 to 13) FRJEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 5cd93085.0554-4471-bcdd-ca2difenkli EFTA01130738 Q. Okay. When you were looking_arneoole to 1 1 that time with Farmer and Fistos and Jaffe and 2 bring in to the firm to legitimize, as you said. Your t 2 Mr. Edwards. 3 fine had a very unique area of practice and had a very 3 Q. Do you know where Mr. Edwards was working 4 unique environment to which to work. How did you know 4 when you first learned of him? 5 or how did you come to decide what people may or may 5 A. I don't recall whether he was working for 6 not fit into that? 6 someone or had his own practice, I don't recall. 7 A. Okay. Renton one second. I think you his) 7 Q. When did you first learn about Brad? 8 accidentally misstated my testimony. 8 A. I don't remember the time frame. 9 I was not bringing the people in to 9 Q. Do you recall when you first met with him 10 legithnize the law firm. I was bringing them in to 10 regarding a job? 11 the legitimate side of the law finn. The bulk of tht 11 A. No. The easiest way to figure that out is 12 law firm, despite the lack of financial success, was a 12 to go look at his personnel file, it will have the 3 large group of very honest, hard working lawyers 13 notes saying when he met with me the first time. 14 trying to do their best in difficult economic 14 Q. You don't have any recollection of your 15 conditions. There were some that were obviously not 15 first meeting with him? 16 legitimate. And the way I decided to bring people in, 16 A. No. As you know, 1 was hiring people left 17 again, it's really everything I just told you. Are 17 and right and I was also unfortunately very busy doing 18 you looking for how 1 brought people into the Poozi 18 things I shouldn't have been doing, so I don't have a 19 scheme? 19 specific recollection of when 1 hired him. 1 barely 20 Q. No, right now I'm just asking about the finn 20 have a specific recollection of when 1 hired me. 21 because, as 1 said, it's a very unique way in which to 21 Q. But you did, in fact, meet with him? 22 practice and a very unique workplace environment with 22 A. I'm certain I met with him before I hired 23 politics and restaurants and parties at your home and 23 him. I can't imagine -- although I did hire people 24 things of that nature. I'm asking, personality wise, 24 without meeting them. I did hire people based on 25 other than the book of business, how did you decide on 25 other people's word, if they were people within the Page 14 Page 16 1 people that would be a good fit? 1 finn that 1 trusted. Because I always said, I had a 2 A. I looked for people that were outgoing, that 2 very simple, you lie or die by what you are telling 3 had the type of personality. On the legitimate side 3 me. If you are telling me this guy is good and he's 4 of the business, people that had charisma that were — 4 not good, that's on you, it's going to hurt your 5 that could go out and hustle and try to develop a book 5 income. So I used to tell my partner, people that 6 of business if they didn't have it. And as one of the 6 were recommending people to me, don't sell me a bill 7 50 percent of the shareholders of the firm I was 7 of goods just to get somebody in here because if you 8 trying to hire people I wanted to work with. 8 do that it's going to come back on you, it's going to 9 Q. Okay. When you would see people from whom 9 affect your income and your ability to grow in the 10 you would offer jobs, for example, as you mentioned 10 firm. So with that admonishment, I might have very 11 earlier with Brad and his practice, if somebody stated 11 well hired someone sight unseen based upon what 12 that people told you that he was a good lawyer, did 12 someone else told me. 13 you need to see him in action, so to speak, prior to 13 Q. But you did meet with Brad you say before he 14 your deciding to hire them or would you just take 14 came in to work? 15 people at their word for it? 15 A. Now that I'm saying it out loud, I think 1 16 A. Some of people I saw in action; he wasn't 16 did but really I'm guessing. I don't have a specific 17 one of them. Steve Osber is an excellent example of 17 recollection ofmeeting him. 18 that. 1 hired Steve after he was beating the living 18 Q. Do you recall if you knew that he had worked 19 daylights out of me on the other side of a case. And 19 as an assistant state attorney for a few years prior 20 I certainly would ask around about the people. But 20 to doing tort litigation? 21 the people that l trusted -- see, I can't remember. 1 21 A. I don't recall that one way or the other. 22 think Gary Fanner was working for me before Brad, and 22 Q. So you wouldn't have asked Howard Scheinberg 3 if I'm not mistaken he would have been one of the 23 or anybody about him before he came to work there? 24 people that 1 went to with regard to Brad because we 24 A. I can't say that I wouldn't have asked 25 were really developing that whole tort group around 25 because, like 1 said, I might have asked. But Page 15 Page 17 5 (Pages 14 to 17) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 1140930854554-447f-buld-cs201O•941d1 EFTA01130739 1 unfortunately, you are taking a little tiny spot out 1 A. Epstein was a billionaire 2 of a very, very busy time period in my life and in the 2 Q. Okay. Did you know anything about the 3 life of the firm, so 1 can't tell you one way or the 3 legitimacy or illegitimacy of the claims prior to 4 other. 4 knowing he was a billionaire? 5 Q. I know you had a lot going on, I'm just 5 A. I knew what I was told. I didn't check it 6 trying to see if you remember anything specific about 6 out myself, but I trusted the people that told me. 7 this. 7 Q. And who told you? B Do you recall what salary you had offered 8 A. The only person I remember discussing it 9 Brad to come join the firm? 9 with, as I sit here today, is Russ Adler. But if 10 A. I do not. You have to just try to 10 Farmer and Jaffe and those guys were with me al the 11 differentiate that what I knew then is a lot different 11 time I likely would havesliseussed it with them a§ 12 than what 1 know now so ... 12 Bra, 13 Q. Meaning? 13 Q. So were you aware of tlt case before tau 14 A. Obviously meaning that at the point in time 14 made an offer to Brad to join the firm? 15 that I was hiring him or maybe a year after,l would 15 A. In 16 be able to tell you what 1 was paying him, but now 16 Q. You said you didn't -- I don't want to 17 it's insignificant. I don't remember how much I was 17 misquote you. You said you heard about it from other 18 paying him. 18 people, but you didn't do anything to know that 19 Q. Did you learn about his book of business or 19 personally. Was that before you made the offer of 20 know what kind of cases he was bringing in prior to 20 employment? 21 hiring him? 21 A. I made the offer of employment based upon 22 A. I do know that he — 1 discussed either with 22 what other people had told me about Brad. 23 Russ, well, I know with Russ, and perhaps some other 23 Q. About Brad and his book of business or just 24 people, I knew about the Epstein case. 24 Brad and his legal skills? 25 Q. What did you know about it? 25 A. Okay. When I say Brad, I mean Brad and his Page 18 Page 20 1 A. I knew that it was a significant case of 1 book of business and his legal skills. 2 potentially significant value against an extremely 2 Q. Okay. 3 collectible_rxxlophi le. for lack of a better word. 3 A. And his ability to generate business in the 4 Q. So was that case your primary motive in 4 future. 5 bringing Brad into the firm? 5 Q. You stated that you believed that you first 6 A. ) doubt it. I mean, I can't tell you one 6 heard about these cases from Russ and then perhaps 7 way or the other, but I doubt that I would bring him 7 from Brad. Once Brad was at the firm, did you keep up 8 in just for one case because what _lithe case fails, 8 with these cases, these Epstein cases? 9 then I'm stuck with a lawyer who can't do anything, 9 MR. SCAROLA: Excuse me, I'm going to 10 you know. 10 object to the form of the question. II is an 11 I'm not saying, Brad, that you couldn't do 11 inaccurate reflection of the prior testimony. It has 12 anything, I'm just saying that if 1 only relied on one 12 no predicate. There was no reference about having 13 case, then if I bring a lawyer in for one case and one 13 heard about these cases from Brad. The names 14 case only, what do I do with him when the case is 14 mentioned were Adler, possibly Farmer, possibly 15 over. 15 Jaffe. 16 Q. How did you know that this case would be a 16 BY MS. HADDAD: 17 collectible case then? 17 Q. Once Brad started workings the firm 18 MR. SCAROLA: I'm going to object to the 18 you've already testified you already knew about these 19 form of the question because it misstated the prior 19 Epstein cases, correct? 20 testimony. The prior testimony was not that it was a 20 A. Yes. 21 collectible case but that it was a case against a 21 Q. How did youlteenabreast of these cases? 22 "extremely collectible pedophile." 22 A. I didn't. 23 BY MS. HADDAD: 23 Q. You didn't know anything about them? 24 Q. What made you think that this case had any 24 A. I didn't say I didn't know anything. I said 25 financial value? 25 I didn't keep track of it. Page 19 Page 21 6 (Pages 18 to •21) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 5od93085.0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d810941dt EFTA01130740 1 Q. You didn't keep track of it? t 1 interaction — 2 A. 1 did not keep track of it. From time to 2 Sony, Tonja, I didn't mean to speak over 3 time Russ and the other guys in the tort group would 3 you. 4 tell me what was going on in certain cases, but until 4 If you talk to the people in the firm. if 5 I made a decision to utilize that file for an illerar- 5 they are honest with you, they'll tell you my 6 purpose related to something illegal that 1 was doing 6 interaction was far more significant with Russ Adler, 7 along with my-co-conspirators, I lust assumed my 7 Probably more so because he was a co-conspirator of 8 •lawyers were going to work the case and eventually it 8 mine. My interaction with Russ was far greater by 9 would hopefully work out well for the law finn. 9 many, many percents over my interaction with Brad, and 10 Q. At your firm, when e-mails would go out to 10 then you go down the line. I had more interaction 1 1 attorneys at RRA or all attorneys at RRA, were you 11 with Mr. Fanner than I did with Mr. Fistos, more 12 part of that e-mail group? 12 interaction with Jaffe than I did with Mr. Edwards, 13 A. You are talking about all staff? 13 and so on. 14 Q. No, all it says is attorneys at RRA. 14 Q. Russ was the head of your tort group, right? 15 A. It's the e-mail group "attorneys"? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Yes. 16 Q. So these cases fell under the tort group; is 17 A. Yes, I'm a part of that e-mail group. 17 that correct? 16 Q. And I appreciate that you were very busy and 18 A. Yes, it fell under the -- fell under Russ' 19 may not have read all of them, but you did receive 19 purview ultimately, yes. 2 0 those e-mails when they would go around? 20 Q. And Brad was a partner at your firm during 21 A. Yes, and I tried my best to read them. 21 the time these cases were there, correct? 22 Q. Okay. At what point did you decide to use 22 A. I believe that was his title. He was either 2 3 this case to further your Ponzi scheme? 23 partner or shareholder. I don't think we had made him 24 A. I don't remember the date, but 1 can give 24 a shareholder yet. 2 5 you the circumstances, if you'd like. 25 Q. But he wasn't coming in as an associate, Page 22 Page 24 1 Q. Please do. 1 correct? 2 A. The Ponzi scheme was running very low on 2 A. To the best of my recollection, no. 3 capital. My co-conspirators and 1 needed to find a 3 Q. So you stated that you learned this case 4 new feeder fund, new investment sources. We had a 4 was -- I don't want to misquote you and listen to a 5 couple of very large, significantly wealthy potential 5 long speaking objection, but what did you call this 6 investors out there. I was looking for something that 6 case? 7 would have been very attractive. We had had a lot of 7 MR. SCAROLA: Who wants the quote? 8 inquiry during the due diligence period with these 8 THE WITNESS: It was a substantial case 9 people that were doing due diligence on the putative 9 with a -- what I perceived to be a highly collectible 10 cases that we were selling. And when I thought about 10 pedophile as a defendant. 11 the Epstein case, realizing that it was a substantial 11 BY MS. HADDAD: 12 actual file in the office, I came up with the idea 12 Q. Right. How did you know at the time when 13 that ifI created a fake confidential settlement 13 you said these investors wanted to investigate and you 14 circling around — based upon this actual_case, they 14 said you were going to create a fake settlement, how 15 would be able to increase the level of due diligence 15 did you know that this case was the case that you 16 that I was able to offer to my potential investors. 16 could use? 17 Q. How did you know this was a substantial file 17 A. From talking to all the people that I just 18 in your office at that time? 18 said, Adler, Fistos, Jaffe, Farmer, Mr. Edwards, to 19 A. Again, through the people 1 spoke to in the 19 the extent that I spoke to him about it. 20 office. 20 Q. Did you speak with Mr. Edwards about the 21 Q. Such as who? 21 case? 22 A. Again, same people, Adler, Farmer, Jaffe, 22 A. I don't have a specific recollection one way 23 Fistos. 23 or the other. 1 remember speaking to him at least 24 Q. You never spoke to Brad about this case? 24 briefly the day or the day of or the day before the 25 A. 1didn't say that. but 1had a lot more 25 actual investor's due diligence was going on as to Page 23 Page 25 7 (Pages 22 to 25) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 5ed93085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d810941d1 EFTA01130741 1 what was going on. And 1 may have spoke to him, I 1 and with that, with the Q-task and the e-mails, did 2 know I spoke to Russ, but 1may have spoke to him as 2 someone assist you with reviewing everything and 3 well within a couple of days just prior to this due 3 letting you know what was going on within the groups? 4 diligence because I was trying to at least get some 4 MR. SCAROLA: Excuse me. I'm going to 5 information in my head that ] could use when I was 5 object to counsel's testimony. Object to the form of 6 creating this story for the investors. 6 the question as leading. 7 Q. Scott, what's Q-task? 7 THE WITNESS: I really don't even 8 A. Q-task is a web based software system that 1 8 understand the question. 9 had invested 37 million in. 9 Can you try to rephrase it for me. Tonja? 10 Q. And what was the purpose of this internet 10 BY MS. HADDAD: 11 system? 11 Q. Of course, I would. 12 A. To be able to communicate in a secure 12 Did you keep abreast of everything that was 13 fashion and in a unique group fashion about specific 13 going on in every practice group or was someone 14 files. 14 through Q-task and e-mails, for example, or was 15 Q. So forgive me, we all know I'm not good with 15 someone giving you information keeping you posted on 16 the computer. That was something that would be useful 16 what was going on within the practice? 17 within a law firm, why? 17 A. Well, as pan of the tort group l had a 18 A. Because it allowed you to create groups and 18 pretty good idea of what was going on there all the 19 have both general and private chats, organize data in 19 time just because of the significant amount of 20 a very unique fashion. That was, at least to our way 20 interaction, both legitimate and otherwise, that I had 21 of thinking, would have been very, very helpful in the 21 with Russ Adler, so I was probably more up-to-date on 22 law firm setting with multiple practice groups. 22 that group than any group other than the labor and 23 Q. Did you belong to any groups on Q-task? 23 employment group, again, because ] had such 24 A. I'm certain that I did. 1 don't remember 24 significant interaction with Stu Rosenfeldt, both 25 which groups I belonged to. I never got into the full 25 legitimately and illegitimately, so I knew what was Page 26 Page 28 1 use of it. I tried to, but again, l was vet), busy 1 going on in that group. 2 doing other things. But 1 know that Mr. Adler's group 2 I tried, as best as I could, given my time 3 used it extensively. 3 constraints, to stay on top of what was going on, you 4 Q. Because it was your firm and, as you said, 4 know, throughout the firm. But 1 relied on other 5 you invested S7 million in it, did you have the 5 people like Debra Villegas and Irene Stay and David 6 ability to access a group if you wanted to? 6 Boden, Les Stracker to the lesser extent, to monitor 7 A. Yes. And if l couldn't,1 could get Russ to 7 what was going on in the different practice groups and 8 give me access. 8 keep me up to speed. 9 Q. So you didn't necessarily have to be invited 9 Q. Was there audio and video surveillance 10 into the Q-task group for you to be able to utilize or 10 throughout the entire firm or only within your office? 11 view the communications within it? 11 A. No, through the entire office, not in the 12 A. No, that's not true. I actually had to be 12 individual offices. 13 invited, that's what 1 was telling Russ to do, is to 13 Hang on. Not in the individual offices but 14 have me invited. 14 throughout the general office space. 15 Q. But I'm saying, the lawyers wouldn't have to 15 Q. So in 2009 how many floors did you have? 16 personally invite you, you can get someone within your 16 A. Three,1 think. 17 firm to give you access maybe without the lawyers 17 Q. And do you recall approximately how many 18 knowing? 18 attorneys you had working there at that time? 19 A. No,1 think it might have had a, quote, 19 A. Approximately 70. 20 unquote, confidential, super secret viewing 20 Q. And when you say "not the individual offices 21 capability, but I don't recall it having that, and I'd 21 but the other areas," do you mean -- would that 22 have no need to utilize that. Just invite me into the 22 include conference rooms? 23 group and let me see what's going on. 23 A. I didn't have surveillance in the conference 24 Q. Okay. 1 know that you are or were a very 24 rooms. 25 hands-on person within certain of the practice groups 25 Q. So can you please tell me exactly where you Page 27 Page 29 8 (Pages 26 to 29) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 Sed93085-0554-4471-bcdtl-ca2d81.3941dI EFTA01130742 1 had audio and/or video surveillance? We'll start with 1 out, because I remember building out space and I 2 audio. 2 remember Jaffe and all those guys moving into that 3 A. I don't have a specific recollection of 3 space. 4 every place I had video and audio, but it was in -- I 4 Q. If you were building up that space, do you 5 had it set up so that in all of the common areas, 5 recall when you put the surveillance in there? 6 including our shareholder's lounge, we had -- I had 6 A. It would have been while they were building 7 audio and video capabilities. 7 it out or shortly thereafter. 8 Q. When you say *capabilities," does that mean 8 Q. During 2009 it seems that you hired lots of 9 you didn't always turn it on or you just turned it on 9 former law enforcement people to work at the firm. 10 when you felt like it? 10 Why were they people you wanted to hire? 1 A. I tamed it on when I felt like it, when 1 11 A. Severalfold. I had a significant amount of 12 felt like seeing what was going on. I sometimes left 12 illegal activity going on with various law enforcement 13 the screen up because) had four computer screens on 13 agencies throughout South Florida and hiring people 14 my desk, I sometimes left the screen on with the video 14 from former law enforcement assisted me in engendering 15 of the reception area and some other general areas. 15 support and camaraderie with the law enforcement that 16 But unless I wanted to see what was going on or listen 16 1 was actually utilizing in illegal activities. 17 to what was going on, I didn't turn it on. It would 17 Q. So you are saying 18 have been too distracting. 18 A. Secondarily, I wanted to have a very strong 19 Q. Did the attorneys know that this 19 investigative team, ultimately, to do both legitimate 20 surveillance existed? 20 and illegitimate things for the law firnt, and hiring 21 A. You can see it in the — it wasn't hidden, 21 former law enforcement was the best way to do that. I 22 you can see it. There were globes up in the ceiling 22 was hoping to actually ultimately create a group. Ken 23 all over the office. 23 Jenne and I had talked about that extensively. 24 Q. Did you have — you said — you didn't 24 Q. Why did you hire Ken Jenne? 25 answer this, you said you didn't recall. Did you have 25 A. Prior to Ken going to prison, he and I were Page 30 Page 32 1 any surveillance in the conference moms? 1 very friendly and he was extremely friendly with 2 A. No. 2 someone that was very close to me, Grant Smith. 3 Q. Other than the common areas you just went 3 During the time that he was down in FDC Miami, I went 4 over, in the hallways and the reception — did you 4 down to visit him. And after speaking to him and 5 have it in the hallways, is that a common — do you 5 after speaking to Grant, I told him, because he was 6 deem that a common area? 6 talking to me about how many people had turned on him 7 A. All the hallways pretty much with the 7 and abandoned him. And I told him that when he got 8 exception of a few blind spots,/ can see all the 8 out of jail that he had no worries, that I would give 9 hallways. 9 him a job. 10 Q. And this was on all three floors? 10 Q. And what -- 11 A. Yeah. For some reason I think we might 11 A. And that was the primary reason -- that was 12 have taken some space on a fourth floor, but I could 32 my primary reason for hiring him. 13 be mistaken. But yes, on the three floors that we 13 Q. What was it you were hiring him to do 14 actively had a significant amount of space on, I tried 14 exactly? 15 to have surveillance on all the common areas of all 15 A. Ultimate the goal was to head up on 16 that space. 16 investigative ann within RRA, within the RRA entities. 17 Q. And what floor was Mr. Edwards' office on? 17 Q. Well, while he was there, since that didn't 18 A. 1 don't recall. 18 happen, what was his obligation to the firm 19 Q. Did you have the tort group all together or 19 day-to-day? 20 was it divided up? 20 A. He handled film security issues and he did 21 A. Except for Adler, Adler was on with -- near 21 handle overseeing certain investigative things. We 22 me, down the hall from me. The rest of the group was 22 had an alcohol and beverage group that was forming and 23 all together. I think they were on — let's see. 23 he was overseeing that. Ile was helping me find new 24 There were people up on 22. I was on 16. He must 24 people to staff it, that kind of thing. 25 have been on the other floor that we were building 25 Q. Did you have a lot of interaction — Page 31 Page 33 9 ( P. ages 30 to 33) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 50c/93085-0554 -4471-bcdthca2d81094101 EFTA01130743 1 A. He had had significant -- as you know, he 1 know, having -- there were mixed reasons. For 2 also had significant political connections and 2 example, I -- are you talking about my Fort Lauderdale 3 everyone who is not living under a rock knows I was 3 police detail? 4 doing everythingI could to gamer significant 4 Q. Yes. You had it at the office and at your 5 political power. 5 home, correct? 6 Q. I think many people miss your parties. 6 A. Yeah. There's a myriad of facts that 7 But, with respect to Mr. Jenne and his 7 motivated me to do that. One was that 1 really wanted 8 political connections, were you hiring him to utilize 8 the security for the office. Two was. I was paranoid 9 him with respect to any of the police department 9 and this is in no particular order. Three was the 10 investigations? You had stated earlier you had 10 Melissa Lewis murder that shook the entire law firm 11 dealings with police departments. I don't want — 11 and shook me terribly. I didn't want that to ever 12 again, I don't want to put words in your mouth. You 12 have to happen again. And four was, I wanted -- the 13 said you had dealings going on with various police 13 more law enforcement you have around, the 14 agencies? 14 more legitimacy it adds to you and your appearance to 15 A. I had —1 mean, we had a criminal defense 15 the community. So there were a multitude ofreasons. 16 section in the law firm, so we had legitimate dealings 16 1 mean, I hired certain law enforcement to 17 with law enforcement. But I also had significant 17 work for me that were just friends of mine that 18 illegitimate things with law enforcement that had 18 were -- that needed additional money, so l wanted to 19 nothing to do with Ken Jenne. 9 make sure that they had money, both guys that did the 20 Q. And how about with respect to former FBI 20 illegal stuff for me and guys that didn't do anything 1 agents you were hiring? 21 illegal for me. 22 A. They were all people that were operating in 22 Q. Let's go back to the Epstein case and when 23 a legitimate fashion within the law firm. 23 you decided to utilize it — to use for the investors 4 Q. In what role was that? 24 for your Ponzi scheme. 25 A. The investigative roles and the alcohol 25 Do you recall approximately when it was that Page 34 Page 36 1 beverage roles and anything else Ken or other staff 1 these investors were coming that you decided to use 2 could think of to have them do. 2 the files? 3 Q. Let's talk about the investigative roles for 3 A. My best recollection it was in 2009, 4 a minute. 4 sometimes after April of 2009, but I don't have a 5 What kind of investigations were these teams 5 specific recollection beyond that. 6 running? 6 Q. What makes you think it was after April of 7 A. I do not know. You have to speak to lawyers 7 20097 8 that were actually utilizing them. I put it out there 8 A. Because, to the best of my recollection, the 9 and Ken put it out there, that they were available to 9 Clockwork Group came in towards the middle of 2009. 10 lawyers in the firm for use like in-house 10 When I say Clocicworlc, that's an umbrella term that 1 11 investigators. And what people did with them 11 use to mean the Von Allmen, AJ Discala, and other 12 ultimately was up to them. 12 investors that came in through that feeder fund. 13 Q. Were they on salary or were their costs and 13 Q. So that was around April 2009? 14 fees associated with utilizing them within a specific 14 A. No, it was after, to the best of my 15 practice group? 15 recollection. I mean, you can tell because all you 16 A. They were all on salary with me. The 16 have to do is look and see when the first, very first 17 ultimate goal was to have it as a separate entity that 17 Clockwork investment is. Actually, you can pinpoint 18 could bill the law firm and have the clients at least 18 it even closer. Look for the very rust settlement 19 defray some of the cost. 1 don't recall whether or 19 deal that we did. that was related to the Epstein case, 20 not we ever got to that level or not. 20 within 60 days prior to that would have been when I 21 Q. With all that in-house police action, why 21 was meeting with those due diligence people, 30 to 22 did you have police security surrounding you all the 22 60 days before that, 23 time? 23 Q. So when you decided to use that case, take 24 A. I guess the best answer was I was paranoid, 24 me through exactly whatyou did to familiarize 25 but I mean -- that's the simple answer to it. You 25 yourself with that case. Page 35 Page 37 10 {Pages 34 to 37) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 5od93085-0554-4471-bcdd•ca2d81041d1 EFTA01130744 1 A. 1 talked to Russ Adler. I may have talke4 1 unrelated to this case, documents related_to the 2 to some of the othedawyers. I flipped through 2 settlements. Other than proving the existence of the 3 certain boxes in the file. 3 case, there's very little an investor, at least from 4 Q. How did you get the boxes? 4 my end, investigates into the actual case.ILav S A. I asked someone to bring them to me. 5 more after having the case exist and not caring about 6 Q. Do you know where those files were stored? 6 really what was going on in the case other than a lqt 7 A. I do not. 7 of money was going to be collected. 8 Q. So you flipped -- sorry, please continue. 8 Q. Well, with respect to showing them that the 9 Flipped through some files? 9 case existed and that there was a likelihood of a 10 A. I flipped through some files. I had the 10 possibility of a payday at the end, how did you 11 files in lily office. The day_that the investor group 11 convince them of that? What did you use to convince 12 came in, I actually had Ken Jenne and some others 12 them of that? 13 actually bring me some more of the boxes actually into 13 A. I did two main things. One, I put the boxes t4 my office while the investors were there. I already 14 in my office while they were there. I told them to 15 had some of the boxes with me. 15 specifically look at a couple of sheets of a flight 16 Q. You say "Ken Jenne and others," who were the 36 manifest that was in the file that Russ had shown me. 17 others to whom you are referencing? 17 And I told them that it would be a breach of 18 A. I don't specifically recall who carried them 18 attorney/client privilege for them to look at the 19 in. I was very focused on my investors at that time. 19 file, but that I was going to step out for a while and 20 Q. Were any of the lawyers present with you 20 leave them there with the boxes, wink, wink, and 21 when you were meeting with these investors9 21 that's what I did. 1 stepped out. I let them look at 22 A. During the actual meeting with them, no. I 22 whatever they wanted to look at. 1 came hack in, they 23 recall that some of the lawyers may have met some of 23 were satisfied that it was a real case and I was off 24 the investors, but I don't recall who. 24 and running 25 Q. Do you recall approximately when that 25 Q. And these were the real legitimate files for Page 38 Page 40 1 happened? 1 this casee• is that correct? 2 A. No, it's the same dates that I was giving 2 A. These were the legitimate files. yes. 3 you before. 3 Q. Nothing had been created at this time for 4 Q. Okay. So you had, to further your Ponzi 4 them to look through? 5 scheme, you had to familiarize yourself with this case 5 A. I didn't add anything to the case files. 6 so that you could speak intelligently with the 6 The case files were significant enough 7 investors; is that correct? 7 Q. Do you know how long they were in your 8 A. Well, sort of because most of what I told 8 office; days, weeks? 9 the investors wasalLthings_that I was creating as I 9 A. The people or the boxes? 10 ,WggL 10 Q. The boxes. 11 Q. About this particular case, the Epstein 11 A. The boxes were in there probably a little 12 case? 12 more than a week. I don't have a specific 13 A. Yes, from an investor .- you have to 13 recollection. 14 understand how the inner working of the Ponzi scheme 14 Q. Okay. Did you ever go through them? 15 were crafted but — 15 A. Yes, I flipped through them at some point in 16 Q. Please tell me then. 16 time. 17 A. I'm telling you hang on. From an 17 Q. And what do you recall about what you saw in 18 investor's standpoint, the investor is simply looking 18 the cases? Do you remember anything? 19 for is the case believable. And once they get past 19 A. I remember seeing the flight manifest. 1 20 that, is it of such case -- excuse me, is it of such a 20 don't recall seeing anythingelse. I'm sure I looked 21 nature that it is possibklo_be generating a 21 at other things, but again, for my purposes it was 22 significant amount of settlement dollars. And then 22 insignificant to me because the actual content of the 23 after that, their concern is simply on the due 23 boxes was not necessary in the sale of the fake 24 diligence side of making wre we actually have the 24 settlements. 25 money, that the documents pass — the documents 25 Q. Why was the flight manifest so interesting Page 39 Page 41 11 (Pages 38 to 41) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 5ed93085-0554-447f-bcddca2d81041df EFTA01130745 1 to you? 1 A. 1 went back to selling the Ponzi deal 2 A. Because of who was on it. 2 Q. And did you sell it? 3 Q. Who was on it? 3 A. I believe I did. You'd have to look at the 4 A. I don't recall, but I do recall saying to 4 actual settlement documents to see if I put one S the investors -- I recall having a conversation prior 5 together for that, but I'm pretty sure we did. 6 to the investors coming in with Ritss_Adler and Russ 6 Q. Do you recall if the investors asked you for 7 had told me that Epstein had flown Bill Clinton on his 7 any additional information or any additional 8 ,plane, had flown Prince Andrew on his plane. And1 8 documentation? 9 don't remember whether that was on any of the lf ight 9 A. I don't recall one way or the other. 10 manifests or not, but I left that to the investors' 10 Q. After this initial meeting with the 11 imagination as to what they were being told about 11 investors, did you give any direction regarding this 12 Mr. Epstein and these other famous people that were 12 particular case? 13 cavorting with Mr. Epstein and let them look at the 13 A. To whom? 14 file. 14 Q. To any of the attorneys working on the 15 You have to understand from an investor's 15 Epstein case. 16 perspective -- hang on. From an investor's 16 A. No. 1 didn't interfere in how they were 17 perspective the only thing that matters to the 17 running their cases. They were far more experienced 38 investor is_that it'snal_case and that they can 18 than 1 was in that type — in handling that twe qf 19 verify that real dollars are being paid. The fact 19 case. As a matter of fact, I was practicing very 20 that it was a real case was evident, I had a lot of 20 little real law at this point in time. I wouldn't 21 boxes with real pleadinjs in it a d a lot of other 21 have had time to tell them or to get involved. 22 information in it. The fact that there was real money 22 Q. Did you ever keep up with this case after 23 being paid was a fiction that was created by me and my 23 this initial meeting with the investors? 24 co-conspirators, everyone from bankers, to computer 24 A. I'm certain that I talked to Russ Adler 25 rats : So the actual role of the case, and I want to 25 about it from time to time, but my main focus by this Page 42 Page 44 1 make sure you understand this, the actual role of the 1 point in time in 2009 was the Ponzi scheme 2 actual physical case in the Ponzi scheme is, from my 2 Q. Did you try to sell this particular 3 perspective, minimal. 11 was just another vehicle for 3 settlement to any other investors? 4 me. 4 A. I don't recall one way or the other. 5 Q. After that initial meeting with the 5 Q. Okay. Did you ever have any conversations 6 investors where they looked at the file, what happened 6 with any ofsourim5tstors about this Epstein case? 7 with respect to their desire or lack of desire to 7 A. I don't recall one way or the other. 8 invest? B Q. I notice there's been a privilege log 9 MR. SCAROLA: Excuse me. Pm going to 9 produced with respect to e-mails. There seems to be 10 object to the form of the question, it assumes facts 10 quite a bit of communication between you and Ken Jenne 11 not in evidence. There's been no testimony that the 11 with the topic being the Epstein case. Do you have 12 investors actually looked at the files, only that 12 any recollection what that would be about? 13 they were given the opportunity to look at the files. 13 A. I don't. As I sit here today, I don't have 14 BY MS. HADDAD: 14 a specific recollection ofhaving significant e-mail 15 Q. Was your video surveillance on when you left 15 contact with Ken Jenne about the case. But if you are 16 the investors alone in your office? 16 telling me I did, I'll accept that, but I don't recall 17 A. No, no,ldidn't have cameras in my office. 17 what it was. 18 I didn't let people look in my office when I was in 18 Q. Earlier you had stated that when you were 19 there, that would have been bad. 19 hiring good attorneys such as Mr. Edwards, looking at 2.0 Q. Soyouleft them alone in there? 20 their book of business was — I don't want to put 21 A. Yes. 21 words in your mouth — it was the legitimacy of the 22 Q. Do you recall for approximately how Ions)? 22 practice, it would bring in legitimate money to the 23 A. No more than 2110 minutes. It was a short 23 practice, is that what yon were hoping to do? 24 *period of time 24 A. Earlier when I testified I specifically 25 Q. When you went back in what happened? 25 testified that I personally did not look at most of Page 43 Page 45 12 (Pages 42 to 45) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 50c193085.0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d8to941d1 EFTA01130746 1 their book of business. This being said I was 1 Q. For the most pan. 2 bringinginlegitirnate lawyers to form legitimate 2 What wasn't fronted by the law firm? 3 sacticegiountice legitimate law. having A. I recall there being a couple of agreements 4 nothing tado with the Ponzi scheme. 34 that various ton lawyers had with certain clients 5 Q. During the year 2009, were there any, to • where they were going to assist in helping to pay the 6 your knowledge, any big settlements of any cases at I 56 costs. All the other costs would have been paid by 7 RRA? 7 the law firm, both through legitimate and illegitimate 8 A. To the best of my recollection, no. We had 8 means. 9 a dismal year. 9 Q. So when you say by "illegitimate means," 10 Q. The year 2009 was just dismal across the 10 where would the illegitimate means money come from? 11 board? 11 A. It came from the Ponzi scheme, and all the 12 A. Some people did better than others, but yes, 12 tentacles of the Ponzi scheme, other illegal activity. 1 3 overall it was fora finn of 70 lawyers, it was 13 Q. Such as? 14 dismal. 14 A. Things I was doing with law enforcement, 15 Q. So there were no big wins coming into the 15 things 1 was doing in politics, things that I was 16 firm as far as a financial windfall other than from 16 doing with organized crime, things 1 was doing with 17 your other businesses? 17 politicians, judges, other lawyers, bankers, business 18 A. The only significant capital coming into the 18 people, things of that nature, I'm sure there's more. 19 firm was money my co-conspirators and I were stealing. 19 Q. Do you recall if any of these Epstein cases 20 Q. Was there any particular practice group that 20 underwent significant investigation while the cases 21 you can remember that had a particularly non-dismal 21 were at your firm? 2 2 year in 2009? 22 A. I'd be guessing. I don't remember. 23 A. Mr. Nurik had a good year. 23 Q. There was a meeting in 2009, July of 2009, 24 Q. Do you recall what the gross revenue was 24 and it appears from the e-mail communications that it 2 5 from legitimate sources in 2009? 25 was for everyone in the firm to attend and it was Page 46 Page 48 1 A. It was somewhere between eight and 1 regarding the Epstein case. In fact, there was an 2 S10 million, probably right around the nine million 2 Epstein conference room that was reserved for it. 3 mark. 3 Were you present at that meeting? 4 Q. Do you know what your -- 4 A. I may have been. 5 A. On its best day. 5 Q. Do you recall? 6 Q. What was your overhead for salaries in 2009, 6 A. I don't recall one way or the other. 7 do you recall? 7 Q. You don't recall it. 8 A. I don't have a clue. 8 Do you recall anything about the Epstein 9 Q. Was it more than you brought in 9 case in July of 2009? 10 legitimately? 10 A. I do not. Do you have something that might 11 A. With what 1 was paying in salaries, l'm -- 11 refresh my recollection? 12 mean, I'd be guessing. If it wasn't more than, it was 12 MS. HADDAD: Can we just take a five-minute 13 certainly close to it. 13 break right now? 14 Q. That's just salary, that's not talking about 14 THE WITNESS: Sure. 15 anything else, rent, overhead, things of that nature? 15 MR. GOLDBERGER: Thank you. 16 A. That's correct. 16 MS. HADDAD: Thanks. 17 Q. Who was paying for the investigations of the 17 [Short recess taken.] 18 cases that were going on in 2009, the deposition 18 BY MS. HADDAD: 19 costs, the filing of complaints, and things of that 19 Q. Scott, I was asking you before we took the 20 nature? Where did that money come from from your 20 break about a meeting with respect to the Epstein 21 firm? 21 cases. There was a 159-page privilege log filed, 22 A. It varied from case to case. 22 which I'm sure you don't have and are not aware of. 23 Q. For the tort group? 23 But in it there are many, many e-mails to both 24 A. It was fronted by the law firm for the most 24 attorneys at RRA, yourself, and Mr. Nurik regarding 25 part. 25 the Epstein litigation. And all this resolved in July Page 47 Page 49 13 (Pages 46 to 49) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 Sect930854554-4471-beddta201,941di EFTA01130747 1 of 2009 about the Epstein meeting and some additional 1 A. I don't recall. 2 investigation into the Epstein case. 2 Q. Did you check/ 3 Does that refresh your investigation as to 3 A. I don't remember one way or the other. It 4 when you met with the investors in the 4 was insiRnificant to me 5 Discala/Clockwork Group? S Q. Well, then explain tome. You testified 6 A. It does not. The best thing to refresh my 6 earlier that what was important to the investors to 7 recollection as to when 1 met with them would be to 7 see is that there was a real case, correct? 8 see the deal documents. 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Okay. I unfortunately don't have those. 9 Q. What did you look at or show them -- what 10 Do you recall if you took Discala and his 10 did you look at, first of all, to see if it was, in 11 other investors to a football game in 2009? 11 fact, a real case? 12 A. Sure,1 did. 12 A. I knew it was a real case. 13 Q. Okay. Would that be around the time you 13 Q. How did you know? 14 were trying to get them to invest in the case? 14 A. Because my lawyers told me it was a real 15 A. It would have been around the time 1 was 15 case. 1 believed them. 16 trying to get them to invest in general. It's may 16 Q. What lawyers told you that? 17 have been around the time that I was showing them the 17 A. I already told you it was a mixture of Russ 18 Epstein file. 18 and Jaffe and Fistos and Farmer and Mr. Edwards. I 19 Q. Did you show them any files other than the 19 mean, l knew it was a real case. We had all these 20 Epstein file? 20 boxes, we had people really working on the file -- 21 A. I may have. 1 don't have a specific 21 Q. How do you know -- 22 recollection one way or the other. 22 A. -- or they were pulling a hell of a scam on 23 Q. You testified earlier that you had over a 23 me. Not that I didn't deserve it but ... 24 dozen boxes brought to your office that were related 24 Q. How did you know, you just said you knew 25 to the Epstein case. 25 people were working really hard on this case. Who do Page 50 Page 52 MR. SCAROLA: Excuse me, counsel. Counsel, 1 you know was working on the case? 2 there has been no such testimony. 2 A. The only people that I knew for certain were 3 BY MS. HADDAD: 3 working on the case was Brad Edwards and Russ Adler 4 Q. You said there were several boxes brought to 4 was doing his supervisory schtick whatever that was. 5 your office by different people. You don't recall who 5 But other than that, I don't know which other lawyers 6 that is; is that correct? 6 were assisting Mr. Edwards. I didn't get involved al 7 A. Yes, I had some boxes already in my office 7 that level. 8 and I had Ken Jenne and some other people bring some 8 As far as the Ponzi scheme goes. the only 9 others. I don't remember how many boxes. 9 thing 1 cared about. Tonic, was being able to show the 10 Q. Was it more than three? 10 investomthat thiscas€tlmt I wasAitilizing to steal 11 A. Sure, it was more than three boxes, yes. 11 a significant amount of money from them was a real 12 Q. Was it more than 10? 12 case. That's all I cared about 13 A. I don't believe so, no. 13 Q. That case came into your office through 14 Q. You stated that you looked —I don't want 14 Mr. Edwards, correct? He brought it with him when he 15 to put words in your mouth. What did you look at 15 came to RRA? 16 specifically in that case? 16 A. Yes. 17 A. Other than looking at the flight manifest 17 Q. He was lead counsel on the case, correct? 18 that Russ Adler told me to look at, I have no specific 18 A. l assume he was lead counsel. I never 19 recollection as to what I looked at in that file. 19 checked to see if he listed himself as lead counsel. 20 Q. Do you know if there was more than one case 20 Q. Do you know if any additional complaints 21 being prosecuted by your office against Mr. Epstein? 21 were filed while the case was at RRA? 22 A. To the best of my recollection there were -- 22 A. I have no idea one way or the other. 23 it was multiple plaintiffs. 23 Q. Did you ever instruct, in furtherance of 24 Q. Okay. Do you recall if those cases were 24 your Ponzi scheme. Mr. Edwards or anyone in that 25 pending in state or federal court? 25 litigation group to file additional complaints? Page 51 Page 53 14 (Pages 50 to 53) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 Sed93085-0554-4471-bcdd-Cadaft941d1 EFTA01130748 A. ,No„ 1 case or any communications -- 2 Q. Who is Cara Holmes? 2 A. I may have. 3 A. Who is who? 3 Q. Do you recall when that -- 4 Q. Cara or Cara, C-a-r-a, Holmes? 4 A. I may have. 5 A. To the best ofmy recollection, she was a 5 Q. Do you recall when that may have happened? 6 former FBI agent or maybe IRS agent. I don't know. 6 A. I do not. 7 She was a former federal agent. 7 Q. Do you recall the first time you looked at 8 Q. Did you hire her to work for you? 8 the flight manifest to which you referenced earlier? 9 A. It was either IRS or FBI. 9 A. Prior to the investors coming in. I don't 10 Q. Did you hire her to work for you? 10 remember the date. 11 A. Yes, I hired her at the suggestion ofKen 11 Q. Did you instruct anybody, to further your 12 Jenne. 12 Ponzi scheme,to or check into anyone 13 Q. For what purpose? 13 whose name was listed on the flight manifest? 14 A. To work in the group that he was overseeing. 14 A. I may have, but with this clarification. If 15 Q. So what did she do for RRA while she was 15 I instructed someone to look into something, I did it 16 there? 16 without that person knowing that I was involved in a 17 A. I don't remember. 17 Ponzi scheme or that what they were doing was illegal 18 Q. Did you ever mention her to your potential 18 and it was just to get me additional information to 19 investors from the Clockwork group? 19 help with my sale of the fake settlements. 20 A- It's a possibility because, as 1 was 20 0. SO it was to further your — 21 building the Ponzi scheme, I frequently referred to 21 A. So I may have asked someone -- I may have 22 the fact that we had former state and federal law 22 asked someone to get me some additional information, 23 enforcement working for us and on our investigative 23 but as I sit here today, I dontrecall ever asking 24 teams. It added legitimacy to the Ponzi scheme. 24 anyone to do anything on the file that was for the 25 Q. Didn't you tell investors that she could 25 purpose of furthering the Ponzi scheme, other than Page 54 Page 56 1 hack into a computer as part of her skills? 1 perhaps getting me a piece of information that 1 2 A. I certainly may have. I told the investors 2 needed. 3 a whole host of lies about what was going on about 3 Q. I'm going to try to refresh your 4 with case and what people could do and did do. 4 recollection as to whether or not you attended those 5 Q. Did you ever personally utilize Cam Holmes' 5 meeting in July of 2009. And it appears that in 6 skills in any of your cases? 6 between the dates of July 22nd, 2009 and July 24th, 7 A. I don't remember. 7 2009, there was a number of communications through 8 Q. Were you handling any cases during the 2009? 8 e-mail by and between yourself, Mr. Adler, Brad 9 A. I was overseeing cases in 2009, but my 9 Edwards and Ken Jenne regarding an Epstein meeting 10 involvement was mostly supervisory. I was handling 10 that was going to be taking place. Do you remember 11 very little that was legitimate at that point in time. 11 that at all? I2 Q. Were you legitimately, when I say 12 A. I think what you are referring to, and I'm 13 "legitimately," were you invited into Q-task on any 13 not certain, but I think that what you are referring 14 particular cases that you can recall? 14 to is me making sure that the file was in the 15 A. I'm certain I was. 1 don't recall one way 15 condition in which I wanted it at the time the 16 or the other. 16 investors were coming in. I don't think it had 17 Q. Do you recall if you were involved in 17 anything to do with the actual functioning of the 18 Mr. Epstein's case on Q-task? 18 Epstein case. I think it had to do with my 19 A. I may very well have been, but I don't have 19 illegitimate purpose. That's the best of my 20 a specific recollection one way or the other. 20 recollection, but if you have documents or something 21 Q. Do you know who invited you in? 21 that you can show me, that would be helpful. 22 A. I have no idea if I was invited in. And if 22 Q. We are not privy to all of the e-mails 23 I was invited in, I have no idea who invited me. 23 because they've been alleged as privileged or work 24 Q. Once you decided to use this case in your 24 product, so I unfortunately can't show them to you. 25 Ponzi scheme, did you go into Q-task to look at the 25 But according to the privilege log between Page 55 Page 57 15 (Pages 54 to 57) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 Sod93085-0554-4471.buld-ca2d81•941d1 EFTA01130749 1 July 22nd and 23rd there were numerous e-mails sent 1 mentioned letting them look through the litigation 2 about the meeting It was almost an all-hands-on-deck 2 boxes, you've mentioned the meeting. What other way 3 type meeting where everybody needed to attend. It was 3 would you have convinced them that it was a real cast? 4 labelled the Epstein meeting with an Epstein 4 A. 1 mentioned letting them look at boxes, what 5 conference room reserved. 5 they did when I was out of the office, that's -- I 6 A. Yes. 6 don't know because I couldn't see what they were 7 Okay. What's your question and I will tell 7 doing. Number two, I may have introduced them to you. 8 people in the office. Number three, I'm certain that 9 MR. SCAROLA: First I'm going to object to 9 when the people brought the boxes to my office I 10 counsel's testimony, but let's hear the question. 10 introduced them to whoever was carrying the boxes. 11 BY MS. HADDAD: 11 And number four. the rest of it would have been all 12 Q. The question is, does that refresh your 12 stuff I created in my imagination because, again, it 13 recollection as to whether or not this meeting took 13 was the sale of something that didn't exist. This was 14 place? 14 not settling, There was no real settlement money. 15 A. To the best of my recollection, I actually 15 There were no real settlement documents. 1 even 16 had introduced some of the investors to some of the 16 manufactured, I think, the actual plaintiff. because I 17 people working on the Epstein case, and that is likely 17 don't recall even knowing the plaintiffs real name or 18 the meeting that you are referring to. But for the 18 if I did it was of no significance to me. 19 life of me, I don't have a specific recollection of 19 Q. How would you have manufactured a 20 it. 20 plaintiffs name, would you have created additional 21 Q. But it could be the meeting where you 21 documents to further your Ponzi scheme using 22 introduced the Epstein litigation team to your Ponzi 22 Mr. Epstein as the defendant? 23 investors? 23 A. No. 24 MR. SCAROLA: Excuse me, I'm going to 24 Q. How would you — 25 object to the form of the question. It misstates the 25 A. The name just would have appeared on the Page 58 Page 60 1 prior testimony. It has no predicate. 1 confidential settlement agreement. 2 BY MS. HADDAD: 2 Q. Would they have already seen the documents 3 Q. That could have been the meeting in which 3 at that point? 4 you introduced the Ponzi investors to people working 4 A. I can't tell you one way or the other what 5 on the Epstein case? S they had seen, because 1 don't know what they actually 6 MR. SCAROLA: Excuse me, counsel. The 6 looked at 7 testimony was that there may have been a meeting at 7 Q. Forgive me, you've now confused me so I'm 8 which investors may have been introduced to some 8 just going to ask you for some clarification. 9 people working on the Epstein file. And your efforts 9 You used a legitimate case and created fake 10 continuously to mischaracterize the prior testimony 10 settlement documents, correct, in_the simplest sense? 11 are highly improper. 1 object. 11 A. If this culminated in_an actuaLsale of 12 BY MS. HADDAD: 12 fake settlement' then theanswer is Yes. 13 Q. Scott, did you or did you not say that you 13 Q. So it was a real case with a real plaintiff 14 introduced seine of the investors to some of the 14 and real defendant, just a fake settlement document? 15 lawyers on the Epstein case? 15 A. No. Let me see if I can clarify this for 16 A. No, I actually said, Tonja, that I may have. 16 you. Over 90 percent of the settlements that I sold, 17 1 have a recollection that 1 may have based upon you 17 the fake settlements, were completely fictitious? 18 just refreshing my recollection but 1 just do not 18 Q. Right. 19 remember one way or the other. This was, in the 19 A. A very small percentage of them were based, 20 scheme of what 1 was doing—insignificant. I was 20 at least in part on sometogstfmal litigation that 21 simply trying to establish to the investors that um 21 eitkr_had °tor was currently occurring. I 22 was a real case, with real potential. with real 22 utilized the Epstein case to holster the visual for 23 lawyers working on it. Other than that, it was of no 23 the investors Mali:eat case existed. Because as 24 interest to me. 24 these were being sold to more sophisticated investors, 25 Q. How else would you convince them? You've 25 sthe uesti ere — how do we Page 59 Page 61 16 (Pages 58 to 61) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 15•03085-0554-447f•bcdd.ca2d8fo941df EFTA01130750 1 knowlhisis a real case? So I was finally able to 1 A. Hold on one second. 2 say this is how you know, here is a case file. I may 2 Okay. What number am I looking at? 3 have, I don't remember specifically one way or the 3 Q. It's a very large document. It's begins 4 other, but I may have utilized actual plaintiffnames 4 with Bates Stamp Number 081 and ends with 264. 5 from the cases filed, but I may have made them up. 1 5 A. It's in the computer, hold on a second. 6 have no specific recollection one way or the other I 6 I have that in front ofme. 7 was totally geared toward simply getting the investor 7 Q. Do you see the date on that complaint 8 money into the Ponzi scheme. 8 stamped? 9 Q. Were you ataemthatthe day after this 9 A. 1 do. 10 meeting took place on July 24th, 2009, a new federal 10 Q. And there's -- give me one second, Scott, 11 complaint was filed against Epstein with one of the 11 sorry. 12 same plaintiffs that was already pending in state 12 What was the date that complaint was filed? 13 court? 13 A. What's the last page of the complaint, 14 A. I don't know that 1 was aware of that or 14 what's the Bates number? 15 not. If they were filing it, someone may have told 15 Q. The last page is 234. I'm sorry, 263 would 16 me. I don't recall one way or the other. 16 be the last page of the complaint. 17 Q. Did you ask anyone to file it to further 17 [The Complaint referred to was marked for 18 ur r121712tschemg.? 18 identification as Defendant's Exhibit I.] 19 A. No,1 don't remember doing that, 19 MR. SCAROLA: You may want to call his 20 Q. Do you recall any situation where you -- 20 attention to the filing stamp on the first page. 21 A. You do realize — Tonja, hang on. I iust. 21 MS. HADDAD: I did. I guess he didn't hear 2 2 want to make sure this record is clear. Other than 22 me. 2 3 Russ Adler, the monk that were involved in the 23 THE WITNESS: 1'm sorry. 2 4 'Epstein case had absolmely_nothing to do with the 24 MS. HADDAD: It's stamped on the first 2 5 Ponzi scheme. 25 Page. Page 62 Page 64 1 Q. Directly? 1 THE WITNESS: Hang on, the complaint is 2 A. Or indirectly. They had nothing to do with 2 dated July 24th, 2009. It was entered onto the 3 it. 3 docket on July 27th, 2009. 4 Q. Yet the file was used for you to further 4 MR. SCAROLA: Do you have another question? 5 your Ponzi scheme. I'm not saying that they gave it 5 MS. HADDAD: I thought he was still looking. 6 to you to use for the Ponzi scheme, I'm asking, you 6 Scott, are you done looking? 7 used their case. I'm not — the question is you used 7 THE WITNESS: Yes, one second. 8 the case? 8 MS. HADDAD: That's what I thought. 9 A. I took advantage of some good, innocent 9 THE WITNESS: No, hang on one second. It 10 people for my own and my co-consnirates illegal 10 shows the stamp on the first page says July 24th, 11 purposes. -Mr. Edwards is one of them. and for that 11 2009. The filing say electronically filed July 24th, 12 am sorry, Brad. 12 2009. There's an entry onto the docket on July 27, 13 Q. Did you ask anyone involved in the Epstein 13 2009, and the complaint is signed July 24th, 2009. 14 case to file a federal complaint? 14 That's all the dates l have. 15 MR. SCAROLA: Objection, repetitious. 15 BY MS. HADDAD: 16 THE WITNESS: Without seeing a document, 16 Q. Okay. And back on Bates Stamp Page Number 17 Tonja, I can't tell you one way or the other. 1 17 263, who's the attorney that filed this complaint? 18 don't want to —1 do not want to guess. If you have 18 A. I don't know if that's his signature, but 19 an e-mail where I'm saying to someone, file a federal 19 the name is Brad Edwards. 20 case, then obviously I did. But I have no specific 20 Q. Okay. And does that e-mail — 21 recollection of that. 21 A. With the squiggle on top of it. 22 BY MS. HADDAD: 22 Q. And does that e-mail address look like the 23 Q. You do have a document with you, it's marked 23 correct e-mail address for RFtA? 24 for you, it's Bates stamped. It begins at EP 081 and 24 A. It is. 25 goes through through 264. 25 Q. So that is, in fact, a legitimate e-mail Page 63 Page 65 17 (Pages 62 to 65) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 5•03085-0554-4471-beddca2dife94101 EFTA01130751 1 address from your firm; is that correct? 1 from federal court? 2 A. Yes. 2 A. I'm certain I did, Tonja. I don't have a I 3 Q. And were you filing any cases back in 2009 3 specific recollection of getting the one pertaining to 4 in federal court? Do you remember how PACER works? 4 this. I don't even know if they sent it to me. I 5 MR. SCAROLA: Which question would like 5 would imagine they'd send it back to Mr. Edwards. 6 7 8 answered? THE WITNESS: I don't remember. MR. SCAROLA: Objection, compound. I6 7 8 Q. The filing attorney? A. I suspect, unless the PACER system is registered on my name, then maybe it comes to me, but 9 BY MS. HADDAD: 9 1 am completely guessing. 10 Q. Do you remember how PACER worked when you 10 Q. But based upon the e-mail communications of 11 were filing a case, Scott? 1 July 22nd and the meeting occurring on July 23rd, this 12 A. I actually never actually did the actual 12 complaint was filed the day of this meeting; is that 13 electronic filing procedure. I had people that did 13 correct? 14 that. I knew that we could file electronically. 14 A. Okay. But here is the problem with your 15 Q. Do you know the purpose of your using your 15 question, I don't remember whether or not there 16 e-mail address when you were filing electronically in 16 actually was a meeting. I said there may have been, 17 federal court? 17 and I don't have an independent recollection of this 18 A. I guess so you can get a receipt, but l have 18 being filed. I do not have an independent 19 no idea. 19 recollection of whether I told someone to file this. 20 Q. Did you ever receive an e-mail from federal 20 And for the life of me, this I am certain of, if I 21 court in your e-mail address that showed that a 21 told Mr. Edwards to file a complaint in federal court, 2' 2 document had been filed with the stamps that you see 22 if there wasn't a legitimate reason for him to do it, 23 on the top of that one? 23 he wouldn't have done it. 24 - MR. SCAROLA: Counsel, are you 24 Q. Do you recall if this federal case was filed ?5 attempting -- 25 when you decided to use the case for your Ponzi scheme Page 66 Page 68 1 THE WITNESS: I don't know one way or the 1 and show it to your investors? 2 other. 2 A. It may have been filed around that time, 3 MR. SCAROLA: Are you attempting to 3 because I haven't been able to establish the exact 4 establish that that complaint was filed in federal 4 time. It also certainly may have been utilized by me 5 court by Brad Edwards? 5 to further the Ponzi scheme. Also, 1 don't have an 6 MS. HADDAD: I'm asking him if he recalls 6 independent recollection of that either. Without 7 the way it's drafted and why. 7 seeing e-mail traffic, 1 can't tell you one way or the 8 MR. SCAROLA: Just ask your question. 8 other exactly what was going on at that time. 9 MS. HADDAD: I'm asking a question. If you 9 Q. Well, then I'll point you to another e-mail 10 have any objection, please lay it on the record. 10 which is marked as EP 001. 11 MR. SCAROLA: No, what 1 want to do is try 11 MR. EDWARDS: Let me see it. 12 to save some time. If what you are trying to 12 MS. HADDAD: I sent a copy to your office. 13 establish is that Brad filed the complaint in federal 13 MR. SCAROLA: He would like to see a copy 14 court on July 24th and used the PACER system, you 14 now. Thank you. 15 don't need to ask any more questions about that, it 15 (The E-mail referred to was marked for 16 happened. 16 identification as Defendant's Exhibit 2.) 17 MR. GOLDBERGER: We appreciate that, but 17 BY MS. HADDAD: 18 when we depose you we'll ask you that question. But 18 Q. Were you able to find it, Scott? 19 we are deposing Rothstein right now so let her ask 19 A. Got it. Yes, I have it. 20 her questions. Don't do this speaking stuff, let her 20 Q. You have it, okay. 21 ask the questions, okay? 21 You said Cam Holmes used to be an FBI 22 MR. SCAROLA: Maybe. 22 agent, correct? 23 MR. GOLDBERGER: Okay. Go ahead, Tonja. 23 MR. SCAROLA: No. What he said is — 24 BY MS. HADDAD: 24 THE WITNESS: FBI or IRS. 25 Q. Scott, did you ever get e-mails like that 25 Page 67 Page 69 18 (Pages 66 to 69) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 Sed93085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d816941d1 EFTA01130752 BY MS. HADDAD: I 1 Q. Never heard that name before? 2 Q. Or IRS. We'll use the blanket term federal 2 A. Alfredo Rodriguez? 3 agent. Is that a fair assessment? 3 Q. Yes. 4 A. Yes. 4 A. It's not ringing any bells to me. 5 Q. Thank you. 5 Q. Do you remember hearing at your office with 6 Do you recall when you hired her to ‘vork for 6 respect to Mr. Epstein's case that one of his former 7 you? 7 employees was willing to come forward with a big book 8 A. I do not. 8 ofnames? 9 Q. Was it in 2009? A. I don't remember that one way or the other. 10 A. I don't have a recollection one way or the 10 Q. You have no recollection of that. 11 other. 11 Do you recall anyone approaching to ask if 12 Q. Okay. Have you ever seen this e-mail 12 the office can purchase this book? 13 before? 13 A. I don't recall that. 14 A. I saw it when I was reviewing your exhibits. 14 Q. Do you recall instructing any of the 15 Before that I have no independent recollection of 15 attorneys in your office to get an opinion from 16 having seen it. I'm not copied on it so ... 16 Kendall Coffey whether or not they can legally and 17 Q. Did you ever have any communications with 17 legitimately purchase this book? 18 Ms. Holmes about people that were close to 18 A. I don't recall that one way or the other. 19 Mr. Epstein? 19 [The Complaint referred to was marked for 20 A. 1 do not remember. 20 identification as Defendant's Exhibit 3.] 21 Q. You stated earlier that you knew that 21 BY MS. HADDAD: 22 Mr. Epstein was a wealthy man. Is that a fair 22 Q. Okay. I'm going to direct your attention to 23 statement? You called him "collectible," was that 23 what's now Bates stamped as EP 002, which I'm sure you 24 because he had money? 24 haven't seen before since you just said you didn't 25 MR. SCAROLA: He called him a billionaire 25 know who he was, but I'll give you a minute to look Page 70 Page 72 1 too. 1 over it. 2 MS. HADDAD: Billionaire. 2 A. This is rather long. Do you want to direct 3 THE WITNESS: I knew he was a billionaire. 3 me to a specific portion of it? 4 BY MS. HADDAD: 4 Q. Sure. If you look at the Page Bates Stamp 5 Q. Do you hive any independent recollection in 5 EP 004, Paragraph 5 and 6. 6 the month of July 2009 of this case being intensified 6 A. Okay. 1 read number five. 7 in any way such as going after those close to 7 Q. Would you please read number six as well? 8 Mr. Epstein? 8 A. Okay. 9 A. I don't remember that one way or the other. 9 Q. Does this refresh your memory as to whether 10 Q. If you knew that Mr. Epstein was a 10 or not anyone ever asked you in your office about 11 billionaire, do you have any recollection of asking 11 purchasing a book? 12 someone to investigate those close to Mr. Epstein to 12 A. It does not. 13 further your Ponzi scheme? 13 Q. Do you know that the cooperating witness was 14 A. I don't have an independent recollection of 14 an attorney who worked for you at your firm? 15 that one way or the other. 15 A. I did not know that until you just said it 16 Q. Do you recall if you ever directed the 16 right now. 17 depositions to be taken of the people who were listed 17 Q. According to Paragraph Number 5, "The 18 on the flight manifest that you saw? 18 deposition of this Mr. Rodriguez occurred on 19 A. I don't recall one way or the other. I may 19 July 27th, 2009;" is that correct? 20 have told the investors that 1 was going to take the 20 MR. SCAROLA: Is it correct that that's 21 depositions without ever intending to take them, but I 21 what it says? I'm going to object to the form of the 22 don't recall one way or the other. 22 question, it's vague and ambiguous. 23 Q. Are you familiar with a gentleman by the 23 BY MS. HADDAD: 24 name ofMr. Rodriguez, Alfredo Rodriguez? 24 Q. That's what's listed in the federal 25 A. No. 25 complaint, correct? Page 71 Page 73 19 (Pages 70 to 73) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 Sed93085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d8fe94141 EFTA01130753 1 A. What does it say? Say it again. 1 A. I may have. I don't recall one way or the 2 Q. It says. "The first deposition occurred on 2 other. You have something that might refresh my 3 July 27th," correct? 3 recollection? 4 A. Yes. 4 Q. Do you know what he does for a living? 5 Q. Some three days after the federal complaint 5 A. I do know the name. Sounds familiar to me, 6 was filed, correct, that we referenced earlier? 6 but I can't recall one way or the other who he was or 7 A. That's correct. 7 what he did. 8 Q. And Paragraph 6 clearly delineates that in 8 Q. Did you instruct your office to begin 9 August 2009 a phone call was received by the 9 investigating Mr. Epstein's pilot or his airplanes? 10 cooperating witness that explained that this 10 A. I do not recall one way or the other. 11 Mr. Rodriguez had a list of other purported victims or 11 Q. You did testify that the flight manifest was 12 contact information for people who Mr. Edwards could 12 the one document you recall for sure looking at in 3 also potentially bring lawsuits for on behalf of; 13 Mr. Epstein's case; is that correct? 14 is that correct? 14 A. Yes. 15 A. I don't know one way or the other. You 15 Q. And if it did, in fact, contain the names 16 know, Tonja, just so this record is clear, you know, 16 that you are purporting that it claimed or that you 17 as I'm sitting here, 1 have a vague recollection of 17 knew of, that would be something that would be juicy 1B perhaps Ken Jenne coming, talking to me and telling me 18 for the investors to further your Ponzi scheme that it 19 that someone in my office was going to cooperate with 19 was a collectible case; is that true? 20 someone in this investigation. But for the life of 20 A. I'm sorry, you have to repeat the question, /) 1 me, I can't be certain of that. So much time has 21 Tonja. I don't understand what you just asked me. 22 passed, but as I'm reading this, and it could be 22 Q. If these big names were on this list, as you 23 completely unrelated to this, I just want to make sure 23 seem to recall they were, that would be most helpful 24 the record is a hundred percent clear, it's possible 24 to you and your Ponzi scheme investors in convincing 25 that Ken Jenne discussed that with me, but 1 don't 25 them it was a big case, right? Page 74 Page 76 1 know who it was. 1 A. If they were on there, or if I lied to them 2 0. You are testifying that you didn't know it 2 and told them they were on there, or if Adler told me 3 had anything to do with the Epstein case, as you sit 3 they were on there and I repeated, all those things 4 here now, you don't remember? 4 would have been helpful to the Ponzi scheme. 5 A.' No, no, 1 don't have a specific 5 Q. You stated earlier that you — the only 6 recollection, and I want to just make sure so 1 answer 6 thing you looked at was the flight manifest because 7 all your questions completely, is that as I'm sitting 7 you were told to look at it. Is that still true? B here my recollection was refreshed that I have a vague 8 A. That's not what I testified to. l testified 9 recollection of having a conversation with Ken Jenne 9 that I flipped through other parts of the file and 10 about the fact that someone in our office was going to 30 that I didn't remember what 1 had flipped through. I 11 cooperate as a confidential informant for some law 11 remember looking at the flight manifest because 12 enforcement agency, I just can't remember if it was 12 Mr. Adler told me about it. 3 the Epstein case or not. 13 Q. You said that you met these investors in 14 Q. Do you recall what you said to Mr. Jenne 14 your office, but there were no cameras in your office, 15 about that? 15 correct? 16 A. No. What I just related to you is all I 16 A. I didn't have cameras specifically in my 17 remember. And I'm not even sure it had anything to do 17 office. 18 with this. 18 Q. You had these investors in your office for 19 Q. Who's Wayne Black? 19 this particular Epstein case? 20 A. Who? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Wayne Black. 21 Q. Do you recall if it was during work hours or 22 A. Sounds like the name of someone I hired, but 22 after work hours? 23 I could be mistaken. I don't recall. 23 A. I do not recall. 24 Q. Okay. You don't recall ever meeting 24 Q. Typically when you were meeting with your 25 Mr. Black? 25 potential Ponzi investors, did you meet them during Page 75 Page 77 20 (Pages 74 to 77) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 5ed93085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d810941W EFTA01130754 1 1 work hours or after work hours? 1 Ponzi scheme investors? 2 A. Both. 2 A. Not really. 3 Q. Did you always meet with them in your office 3 Q. Would it have given more legitimacy to your 4 or did you do it more socially down at Bova or 4 allegation that it was a good case in which they 5 elsewhere? 5 should invest? 6 A. Both. 6 A. In the way that I was selling the Ponzi 7 Q. But with this particular case, do you recall 7 settlements, it would have likely been overkill. 8 meeting them at least one time in your office where 8 Q. So did you ever instruct them not to speak 9 they could look through the files? 9 to the press about the case? 10 A. Actually, that group of investors were 10 A. I don't recall that either one way or the 11 looking at a lot of different cases or al least 11 other. 12 multiple different cases that we were attempting to 12 Q. If it had gotten out there that the cases 13 lure them into the Ponzi scheme utilizing, so I met 13 had not, in fact, settled, as you were claiming when 14 with them on multiple occasions, both in my office and 14 you were selling the settlement, would that have I S at restaurants. 15 hindered your case, your Ponzi investor's case? 16 Q. Who is Mike Fisten? 16 A. Not really because they would have no way of 17 A. Mike Fisten was a law enforcement officer of 17 knowing if I had created a fake plaintiffs name. I 18 some type that I hired. 18 mean, there could have been something in the news 19 Q. Why did you hire him? 19 that -- and I don't know that there was -- there could 20 A. He was a Ken Jenne suggestion. 20 have been something in the news that says none of this 21 Q. And were you hiring him to start up your 21 settled. And 1 just simply would have created a fake 22 company with Mr. Jenne, as you indicated earlier? 22 name with my co-conspirators, created a fake set of 23 A. I don't recall what the purpose of hiring 23 settlement documents and handle it that way. 24 him was. It had nothing to do with what Ken Jenne was 24 Q. Did you know where Mr. Epstein lived? 25 doing for us. 25 A. I only knew that he was from Palm Beach, Page 78 Page 80 1 Q. So what did he do at BRA? 1 other than that, no. 2 A. My best recollection is that he had been a 2 Q. Okay. In 2009, did you ever have any firm 3 former ADT officer and so it would reason that he 3 meetings? 4 would be working in our alcohol beverage practice that 4 A. Of any type? 5 we were establishing. 5 Q. Of any type, in general, finn meetings. 6 Q. Do you know if he ever did any work for your 6 A. I'm certain 1 did. 7 firm as an investigator? 7 Q. Do you recall about how many? 8 A. He may have. 1 don't have a specific 8 A. I do not recall. 9 recollection one way or the other. 9 Q. Did you eve• have any partner meetings? 10 Q. Did you ever speak to the press about the 10 A. Yes. 11 Epstein case? 11 Q. Do you recall how many? 12 A. 1 don't have a recollection one way or the 12 A. I do not. 13 other. 13 Q. Do you recall how many partners you had at 34 Q. Did you ever have Kip utilize the Epstein 14 the firm in 2009? 15 case to put any publicity or spin out there with 15 A. I do not. 16 respect to the case" 16 Q. Do you recall how many fundraisers you had 17 A. I don't have a specific recollection of that 17 at your home in 2009? 18 one way or the other. 18 A. I do not. 19 Q. Did you ever instruct Brad or Russ to talk 19 Q. More than 10? 20 to the press about the case? We'll start with Brad 20 A. I'd be guessing, Tonja. 21 then Russ. 21 Q. Okay. 22 A. I do not specifically recall getting 22 A. It's easy enough to check, there's state and 23 involved at the publicity level of that case. I don't 23 federal records of all that stuff. 24 have a recollection one way or the other. 24 Q. In 2009, did you still require the attorneys 25 Q. Would that publicity have been good for your 25 from your firm to attend the fundraisers you would Page 79 Page 81 21 (Pages 78 to 81 ) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 Sec/93085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2081e941dl EFTA01130755 1 have? 1 Q. When did you hire him? 2 A. You said "still require," which would have 2 A. 2008 or 2009. I don't have a specific 3 meant that I testified -- 3 recollection. 4 Q. Sony. 4 Q. If you hired lawyers who didn't have a book 5 A. -- previously that it was requiring them. 5 of business, what kind of practice did they do at your 6 Q. Did you require attorneys at your firm to 6 office? 7 attend your fundraisers? 7 A. It depended upon the lawyer. I would have 8 A. I asked them to, I urged them to, I tried to 8 tried to get them to work with other lawyers in an 9 cajole them into coming, but it wasn't an absolute 9 area that they either were proficient in or wanted to 10 requirement. 10 become proficient in. 11 Q. Do you recall between April and July of 2009 11 Q. Okay. You had a meeting at your office 12 how many fundraisers you would have had? 12 during which you were asking about information 13 A. I do not. 13 regarding referring attorneys, attorneys who had 14 Q. Did you have fundraisers anywhere besides 14 referred business to the firm. Do you know what I'm 15 your home in 2009? 15 talking about? I believe it was back in December of 16 A. 1 probably did, but I don't recall without 16 '08 or early 2009. 17 seeing the documents. If you have the invitation or 17 A. The way you are characterizing that meeting, 18 the e-mails, that would help me. 18 had a lot of meetings like that. 19 Q. Did you hold fundraisers at your office in 19 Q. What was the purpose of those? 20 2009? 20 A. You are going to have to be more specific 21 A. I may have. That wouldn't have been 21 for me, Tonja. 22 unusual, but I don't have a specific recollection. 22 Q. Let's start generally then. What was — you 23 Q. Did you ever meet any of the plaintiffs in 23 said you had many meetings like that. Tell me what 24 the Epstein case? 24 these meetings were for? 25 A. I don't have a specific recollection of 25 A. Making sure that we were maximizing Page 82 , Page 84 1 that. 1 generation of business into the law form. 2 Q. Do you recall ever revving copies of e-mails 2 Q. What kind of business, legitimate business 3 from Mr. Jenne with respect to the plaintiffs in the 3 or the other -- 4 case that the subject matter would say "information we 4 A. Legitimate business. 5 need to use"? 5 Q. Sorry, l couldn't hear you. 6 A. I don't recall that one way or the other. 6 A. Legitimate business. The general meetings 7 It's certainly possible. 7 that you are discussing, that was legitimate business. 8 Q. Do you recall ever reviewing anything that 8 Q. So there was a meeting for all attorneys to 9 was titled "causes of action against Epstein"? 9 attend regarding generating business, those meetings 10 A. I do not have a specific recollection of 10 were for the legitimate business? 11 that one way or the other. 11 A. If it was addressed to all attomeys, yes. 12 Q. Do you recall ever reviewing with Mr. Jenne 12 Q. Okay. And if an e-mail went out to all 13 or any other investigator in your firm any information 13 attorneys, did paralegals and support staff get it as 14 regarding Mr. Epstein's house staff or airplane staff? 14 well or was it just directed to the attorneys? 15 A. I do don't recall that one way or the other. 15 A. Certain support staff probably were on that 16 I may have, I may not have. 16 list, like my CFO and COO, and perhaps my IT people, 17 Q. Who is Bill Berger? 17 but it was general for the attorneys. 18 A. A former Palm Beach judge that we hired. 18 Q. With respect to your IT people, did you have 19 Q. Okay. What was his role at your firm? 19 the capability to review e-mails and Internet activity 20 A. He was a shareholder. 20 of all of your employees? 21 Q. What kind of practice? 21 A. I did. 22 A. Litigating cases. 22 Q. Including attorneys? 23 Q. What kind of practice did he litigate? What 23 A. I did. 24 kind of cases did he litigate? 24 Q. Did you ever utilize that tool? 25 A. I don't recall specifically. 25 A. Very infrequently. It was a pain because I Page 83 Page 85 22 (Pages 82 to 85) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 5ed93085-0554-4471-beddca2011941d1 EFTA01130756 1 had to have Curtis Renie or Bill actually come into my 1 where we owed 20, $30 million in Ponzi payments out 2 office, set up a special icon to allow me to do that. 2 and she needed to write a check for even S5,000, she 3 It was a real pain, so it was rare. 3 probably would have checked with me on that. So 4 Q. Who else attended the meetings that you had 4 substantial and whether or not she would have checked 5 with the Clockwork group with respect to the investors 5 with me depended upon the circumstance at the time. 6 in the Epstein case? 6 Q. You stated earlier, and 1 think I'll get 7 A. There were multiple meetings with what 7 this quote right, that 2009 was a dismal year; is that 8 call the Clockwork investors at various points in 8 correct? 9 time. A variety of people came in and out of the 9 A. For the legitimate law firm business, it was 10 meetings. Some of the meetings occurred down in Bova. 10 a dismal year. 11 Other people came up to the meetings. Some of the 11 Q. So in the months immediately preceding the 12 meetings involved Michael Szafranski, our fake 22 dissolution ofRRA, July to October of 2009, what 13 independent verifier. Some of the meetings may have 13 would you consider a substantial expense that had to 14 involved bankers and the like. I cannot tell you 14 be approved? 15 specifically who was at those meetings. 15 A. It would vary literally from day-to-day. 16 Q. The specific meetings that we are talking 16 Q. Do you have any independent recollection of 17 about with -- where you left the boxes at your office, 17 how you were doing in, say, July 2009? 18 do you recall who else was there with you at that 18 A. The legitimate business was always doing 19 meeting? 19 poorly in 2009, as far as I was concerned. 20 A. 1 only remember there being a handful of 20 Q. So would you have -- 21 people from the investment group and myself. I don't 21 A. The Ponzi scheme had its moments of 22 recall — and I remember the guys bringing the boxes 22 significant wealth and significant poverty, so it 23 the down, but they didn't stay for the meeting. There 23 varied from time to time. It was a daily thing. 24 may have been other people there, I don't recall one 24 Sometimes it was hourly. It just depended upon what 25 way or the other who it was. 25 was coming in and what needed to go out. Page 86 Page 88 1 Q. If the expenditures were being made on a 1 Q. So would you have to utilize the 2 case that were substantial, did you have to approve 2 illegitimate funds to fund the legitimate cases at 3 them or did you have a specific practice for them? 3 times? 4 A. The head of a practice group could basically 4 A. Yes. 5 approve them but Irene, ow CFO, would generally run 5 Q. And that varied daily you said? 6 than by me before she actually cut the check. If I 6 A. Well, all the money was commingled together, 7 wasn't around she'd run it by Stu. 7 so we used whatever funds were in there to fund both 8 Q. So as the equity partners you had the 8 the legitimate and the illegitimate financial 9 authority to make the determination what funds could 9 requirements of the firm, the Ponzi scheme and other 10 and could not be expended? 10 legitimate and illegitimate things that were going on. 11 A. As the shareholders, as the two 50 percent 11 Q. If an outside agency or investigator was 12 shareholders, we controlled the finances. 12 being utilized for a case and they needed a signed 13 Q. And if Irene was coming to you to tell you 13 retainer agreement with your fine, would you have to 14 what the funding was for, to get approval rather, 14 approve that? 15 would she tell you specifically what the funding was 15 A. It would depend upon the significance of the 16 for or just tell you "we need $100,000"? 16 expense. I didn't necessarily get involved in every 17 A. No, if it was a substantial expense -- 17 retention of every expert in every case. 18 Q. Tell me what you deem as substantial. 18 Q. Okay. So it would depend on the cost or the 19 A. That would have been — substantial to me 19 nature of the case? 20 would have been based upon how much money we had in 20 A. Who the lawyer was, their level of 21 our coffers at the time. So, if it was one of those 21 expertise, all things of that nature. 22 periods of time where we had 20 or $30 million 22 Q. If it was this gentleman who you have no 23 floating around the law firm, Irene probably would 23 recollection of meeting, Mr. Black, and the attorney 24 have just written a check without even letting me know 24 was Mr. Edwards, was that something you needed to look 25 we were writing it. If it was one of those times 25 over? Page 87 Page 89 23 (Pages 86 to 89) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.66'77 6ed93085.0554-447f-bccid-ciadele941d1 EFTA01130757 A. Did Wayne Black work for Ron Cacciatore? 1 Short recess taken.) 2 Q. Are you asking me -- 2 FURTHER DIRECT EXAMINATION 3 A. I'm asking anyone in the room who wants to 3 BY MR. GOLDBERGER: 4 talk to me. 4 Q. All right. Mr. Rothstein, Jack Goldberger, S Q. I love to talk to you, but 1 don't know the 5 I'm going to ask you some questions now. You 6 answer to that question. He might have. Brad might 6 testified that you knew Jeffrey Epstein was a 7 be able to tell you. 7 billionaire. You did testify to that today, correct? 8 MR. EDWARDS: No. 8 A. Yes. 9 THE WITNESS: When you said Wayne Black's 9 Q. Okay. Tell me how you knew that. How did 10 name again and that I hired him to do something, I 10 you know that Mr. Epstein was a billionaire? 11 seem to think that he may have been associated in 11 A. Russ Adler told me. I looked him up on the 12 some way with Mr. Cacciatore, but I'm not sure one 12 internet. 13 way or the other. I don't remember whether or not I 13 Q. What did you look on the internet about 14 met Mr. Black, it's possible I did, it's also 14 Mr. Epstein? 15 possible I did not. And I don't have an independent 15 A. I don't recall, but I remember looking up an 16 recollection of retaining him to do anything or 16 seeing that he was very wealthy, that he was a 17 whether 1 was pan and parcel of the decision if we 17 billionaire. 18 did, in fact, retain him, whether I was part and 18 Q. Okay. So as far as learning that 19 parcel of the decision to retain him. 19 Mr. Epstein was a billionaire, you learned via two 20 BY MS. HADDAD: 20 ways, one was from Russ Adler, correct? Is that 21 Q. Traveling out of state for depositions for 21 correct? 22 the particular cases, did you have to approve that? 22 A. Yes, sir. 23 It would depend upon who the lawyers were, 23 Q. And the other was through looking up 24 the significance of the expense. It would have been 24 Mr. Epstein on the internet, correct? 25 case by case. I certainly would not have been 25 A. Yes. Page 90 Page 92 1 approving or disapproving Mr. Nurik's travel, 1 Q. Okay. And you don't know what you reviewed 2 Mr, Rosenfeldt's travel, Mr. Boden's travel, 2 on the internet in an effort to determine that 3 Mr. Lippman's travel. That was their own thing. 3 Mr. Epstein was a billionaire; is that correct? 4 If a younger lawyer like a Shawn Bitten came 4 A. I do not recall. 5 erne and said he need to travel out of state for 5 Q. Do you know when you did that? 6 something, if it was just for a deposition, I wouldn't 6 A. I do not. 7 have gotten involved in that unless he was telling my 7 Q. Was it prior to your needing to use the B CFO, Ms. Stay, that he wanted to fly first class and 8 Epstein case to further your Ponzi scheme? 9 stay in the Ritz Carlton, then I would have gotten 9 A. Yes. 10 involved. But other than that, no. The firm was too 10 Q. Okay. So prior to -- I think you indicated 11 big for me to get involved on a daily basis with all 11 that you needed an influx of money at some point and 12 that stuff. 12 that's when you decided to use the Epstein case in 13 Q. If Brad had to go out of state to take a 13 furtherance of the Ponzi scheme; is that correct? 14 deposition, you wouldn't be the person to approve or 14 A. Yes. 15 disapprove that? 15 Q. So prior to that time though, prior to 16 A. Russ Adler would have handled that. And if 16 determining that you needed to use the Epstein case 17 there was an issue, Russ would have come to me. And I 17 for the Ponzi scheme, you looked up Mr. Epstein and 18 don't know what the relationship was specifically 18 you spoke to Mr. Adler about his work; is that 19 between Brad and Russ, but it's certainly possible 19 correct? 20 that Brad just was going to go do what he needed to do 20 A. Yes. 21 to properly handle the case and I would have trusted 21 Q. Why did you do that, Mr. Rothstein, if you 22 him to do that. 22 weren't using the Epstein case at that point in your 23 MS. HADDAD: Can we just take a second. We 23 Ponzi scheme? 24 are going to take a minute, okay? 24 A. Because it was a legitimate case in the 25 THE WITNESS: Sure. 25 legitimate portion of RRA that I had reason to believe Page 91 Page 93 24 (Pages 90 to 93) FRiEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 Sed93085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d8fadidf EFTA01130758 1 from speaking to Mr. Adler could bring in a 1 Q. What did Adler tell you about the Epstein 2 significant amount of money to the firm. 2 case that Edwards had at the time you were 3 Q. At that time Mr. Adler was one of your 3 contemplating hiring him to become a member of the 4 co-conspirators in the Ponzi scheme; is that correct? 4 Rothstein firm? 5 6 7 A. By this time, yes, sir. Q. Okay. When did Mr. Adler become a co-conspirator in your Ponzi scheme? I5 6 7 A. He told me that it was a huge case involving a billionaire pedophile and that it was a winner. Q. Did you, when you heard that, did you think 8 A. I don't recall the specific date. 8 that that was a case that could become pan of your 9 Q. Was it before or after Mr. Adler recommended 9 Ponzi scheme? 10 that Brad Edwards be hired at your firm? 10 A. No, I actually thought of it as a way to 11 A. Before. 11 earn legitimate money to help me out of the Ponzi 12 Q. So before Brad Edwards was hired at RRA, 12 scheme. 13 Russell Adler was a co-conspirator ofyours in the 13 Q. So at the time you hired Mr. Edwards and you 14 illegal part of the 1212.A firm; is that correct? 14 were talking to Adler about Edwards, you were trying 15 A. Yes. 15 to get out from under the Ponzi scheme? 16 Q. Then after that time you hired — 16 A. In the bulk of 2009 I was praying for some 17 Mr. Edwards was hired after Adler was your 17 son of legitimate influx of money to get out of the 18 co-conspirator? You are laughing, you are smiling, 18 Ponzi scheme. 19 why is that, sir? 19 Q. Okay. So now Adler tells you about this 20 A. Because when you say "RRA" that way, the 20 Brad Edwards guy, did you know Brad Edwards before 21 speaker sounds, it sounds like you are roaring. 21 Adler talked to you about him? Had you run into him? 22 Q. Okay. I'll just say Rothstein, how about 22 A. I may have. I don't have a specific 23 tki? You know what I'm talking about if 1 just say 23 recollection one way or the other. 24 R0thstein. 24 Q. Okay. So now he-tells you that you should 25 It A. RRA is fine. 25 consider hiring Brad Edwards, this is your Page 94 Page 96 1 Q. Okay. So Adler is your co-conspirator in 1 co-conspirator talking to you, right? Is that 2 the Ponzi scheme at the time that Brad Edwards is 2 correct? 3 hired, correct? 3 A. Yes. 4 A. Yes. 4 Q. And he says, by the way, he's got this great 5 Q. Okay. Was it Adler who recommended to you 5 Epstein case involving this billionaire, correct? 6 that Brad Edwards be hired? 6 A. Yes. 7 A. Yes. He was one of the people. 7 Q. Presumably then-you had a meeting with Brad 8 Q. Who else recommended that Edwards be hired? 8 Edwards when you met him; is that correct? 9 A. I don't have a specific recollection of who 9 MR. SCAROLA: Presumably he had a meeting 10 it was, but others did. 10 when he met him? 11 Q. All right. But you have a recollection of 11 MR. GOLDBERGER: I'm sorry, Mr. Scarola was 12 Adler being one of the people, so let's talk about 12 cutting you off when you answered, so go ahead, answer 13 that, all right? 13 again. 14 What did Adler tell you about Brad Edwards 14 MR. SCAROLA: I didn't understand the 15 when you hired him? Did he tell you that he had these 15 question. 16 Epstein cases or an Epstein case in the fold? 16 BY MR. GOLDBERGER: 17 A. Among other things, yes. 17 Q. Do you understand the question, 18 Q. What else did he tell you? 8 Mr. Rothstein? 19 A. Told me he was a great lawyer and a great 19 A. I'm not sure I do because you asked me if I 20 guy. 20 had a meeting when I met him and I think that meeting 21 Q. Did he tell you what his history was, what 21 him is a meeting. 22 Edwards' history was prior to coming to the Rothstein 22 Q. Well, there was a meeting, correct? 23 firm? 23 A. I most likely met him before I hired him. I 24 A. I'm certain that 1 asked him, but 1 don't 24 most likely talked to him before I hired him because 25 have a specific recollection of that conversation. 25 that was my general way of doing business. It's all Page 95 Page 97 25 (Pages 94 to 97) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 Sed93085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d810941d1 EFTA01130759 1 together possible that I gave Russ the okay to hire i 1 factor I considered. 2 him before, I just don't have a specific recollection 2 Q. All right. Do you know whether he brought. 3 one way or the other. 3 in his book of business, do you know whether he 4 Q. At some point,1 take it, you learned, 4 brought any other cases to the firm other than the 5 whether you sat in on a meeting when Mr. Edwards was 5 Epstein case? 6 hired or whether your co-conspirator hired him, at 6 A. I don't recall one way or the other. 7 some point you learned that Mr. Edwards, in fact, had 7 Q. Okay. Do you know whether your well, bad 8 been hired by the firm; is that correct? question, I won't ask that. 9 A. I'm certain that I gave the final okay to 9 Now, you've talked a lot about Ken Jenne 10 hire him. 10 here this morning. Was Ken Jenne part of your Ponzi I. 1 Q. Okay. When you were giving the final okay 11 scheme? 12 to hire him, I assume there had to be discussion of 12 A. No, sir. 13 the money that he was going to be paid, correct? 13 Q. Had nothing to do with it, right? 14 A. With somebody, yes. 14 A. That's correct. 15 Q. Certainly with Mr. Edwards, right? I assume 15 Q. Other than his having -- working for you as 16 he wanted to know how much he was getting paid. 16 an investigator, he was not one of your 17 A. Yes, but 1 don't have a specific 17 co-conspirators, right? 18 recollection of whether 1 discussed that with him or 18 A. He didn't work for me as an investigator, he 19 whether I authorized Adler or maybe even Rosenfeld! to 19 worked for me heading up our investigative division, 20 discuss it with him. 1 don't recall. 20 heading up our internal security, heading up my 21 Q. Do you have the slightest idea how much 21 personal security, and acting as a political advisor 22 money Mr. Edwards was paid when he first joined the 22 to me. 23 firm, what his salary was? 23 Q. Okay. Did he serve any kind of 24 = A. I don't have an independent recollection. 24 investigative function at all, after all, he was a law 25 - Q. Generally someone like Mr. Edwards at his 25 enforcement officer at one point in his career? Page 98 Page 100 1 level of accomplishment and his age, you know what the 1 A. I note that he assisted the other people at 2 general salary would have been at your firm? 2 the firm that were doing the investigative work. I 3 A. It didn't work that way. 3 don't know if he personally did investigative work. 4 Q. I see. Tell me how it worked. 4 He may have. 5 A. It's a case-by-case basis. 5 Q. Do you know whether Mr. Jenne, in his role 6 Q. Tell me how it worked. 6 as your advisor or your political consultant, do you 7 A. Case-by-case basis. 7 know if he was involved in any kind of illegality, 8 Q. And how did you make that determination on a 8 illegal wire tapping or anything like that while he 9 case-by-case basis? 9 was at Rothstein? 10 A. Actual book of business, potential book of 10 MR. SCAROLA: Excuse me, I'm going to 11 business, potentiality for growth, character, what he 11 object to the form of the question, vague and 12 brought to the table, and obviously a function of how 12 ambiguous. 13 much money we had available at the time. 13 THE WITNESS: To my knowledge he was not. 14 Q. Okay. And you don't have any recollection 14 BY MR. GOLDBERGER: 15 of the machinations that occurred in determining what 15 Q. To your knowledge, no? 16 Mr. Edwards salary would be, correct? 16 A. Correct. 17 A. I do not. 17 Q. Okay. You talked about having a bunch of 18 Q. But certainly one of the things you would 18 fundraisers, I know you had a bunch of fundraisers 19 consider would be the book of business, i.e. the 19 that was kind of a deal at Rothstein. This was kind 20 Epstein case, right? 20 of a rock star law firm, right? I mean, you had lots 21 A. I'm certain that I did consider the Epstein 21 of fundraisers, lots of parties, right? Was that the 22 case. 22 image you were trying to present? 23 Q. Do you know whether he brought any other 23 A. In reality that's the way we were. 24 book of business — 24 Q. Okay. 25 A. But I'm also certain it wasn't the only 25 A. A lot of young lawyers having a good time, Page 99 Page 101 26 (Pages 98 to 101) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 5ed93085-0554-447f-bcdd-ca2d8le9411dt EFTA01130760 1 trying to make money. 1 was a real case going on. but that within that I would 2 Q. And these young lawyers, would you consider 2 have to create some sort of fictions in order to cell 3 Mr. Edwards to be a young lawyer or a middle-aged 3 the fake product, 4 lawyer? 4 Q. Okay. At the time that you decided to use A. Young lawyer. the Epstein case as pan of your illicit Ponzi scheme 6 Q. Okay. Was he one of young lawyers that came : theme, I think you testified earlier today, when you 7 to these fundraisers at your home? I 7 were in some dire straights, you needed an influx of 8 A. 1 don't recall whether he was there or not. money, right? 9 1 recall him being at some, but I didn't know if he 9 A. Yes. 10 was at all of them. 10 Q. That's when you decided to use the Epstein 11 Q. Okay. You do recall him coming to some of 11 matters, cornet? 12 the fundraisers, though, correct? 12 A. Yes. 13 A. 1 recall him being at my home. It may have 13 Q. Okay. And you knew, I assume, being the 14 been for firm parties or other parties, it may have 14 Ponzi scheme mastermind here, that you needed to make 15 been for fundraisers there. 15 sure that you had at least a working knowledge of the 16 Q. And that was during the time period that the 16 Epstein case so that you could answer questions to the 17 Ponzi scheme was still going on, correct? 17 investors. I recognize that you left the room and 18 A. Yes. 18 told than to look at it, but you had to some knowledge 19 Q. Did Adler ever the tell you about any 19 of the case, right? 20 discussions he had with Brad Edwards about the illegal 20 MR. SCAROLA: Counsel, that's a 21 part of the operations at Rothstein? 21 misrepresentation of what the earlier testimony was. 22 A. Can you reask the question, please? 22 I object, no proper predicate. 23 Q. Sure. Sure. 23 MR. GOLDBERGER: Okay, let's go through the 24 Did Russell Adler ever tell you — Russell 24 whole thing again. 25 Adler is your co-conspirator, we've established that. 25 MR. SCAROLA: No, you are not going to go Page 102 Page 104 1 Did Russell Adler in the furtherance of your 1 through the whole thing again. Just because we have 2 conspiracy ever tell you he had discussed with Brad 2 tolerated two lawyers asking questions, does not mean 3 Edwards about the illegal activities at RRA? 3 we are going to tolerate two lawyers asking the same 4 A. No. 4 questions. 5 Q. Now,you testified when asked about whether 5 MR. GOLDBERGER: Your objection is noted. 6 the press — if you were involved in asking the press 6 BY MR. GOLDBERGER: 7 to run with theEnsteinstorr. YOU said something to 7 Q. Okay. So let's talk about your need to use 8 the effect, "the way] was selling_the_Eonzi scheme it 8 the Epstein case to further your conspiracy. You 9 would be overkill." 9 needed an influx ofmoney, did you not? 10 I didn't understand your answer like you 10 A. Yes. 11 didn't understand some ofmy questions, so I'd like 11 Q. Okay. You decided to use the Epstein case 12 you to kind of tell me what you meant by that. 12 for that purpose, right? 13 A. 1 was selling purportedly confidential 13 A. Yes. 14 settlements. Confidentiality was the hallmark of the 14 Q. And in order to use the Epstein case, you 15 lnirheme, so too much publicity would have created ora 15 were going to meet with the investors and pitch the 16 a problem for me in the sale of what was supposed to 16 Epstein case with the investors, correct? 17 be a completely confidential settlement 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. 1 think what you are telling me, and I don't 18 Q. And in an effort to pitch the case to the 19 want to misstate what I think you are telling me, but 19 investors, you had to have some knowledge of the case, 20 is it true that you felt some publicity would be okay 20 did you not? 21 but too much would be counter to the purposes of the 21 A. Some level of knowledge, yes, sir. 22 conspiracy. Is that a fair statement? 22 Q. Okay. And in order to gain that knowledge, 23 A. The way I was thinking about it at the time 23 you spoke to your co-conspirator, Russell Adler, is 24 this was going on was that some publicity would assist 24 that correct? 25 in establishing for the potential investors that that 25 A. That's one of the things I did. Page 103 Page 105 27 (Pages 102 to 105) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 Sed93085-0554-4471-btdd-ca2dale941d1 EFTA01130761 1 Q. Okay. And do you remember what Adler told 1 were all the manifests within the law firm of RRA and 2 you specifically about the Epstein case that helped 2 you simply didn't have them in your office? 3 you have a basis of infonnation to sell it to the 3 A. I have no idea one way or the other. 4 investors? fi 4 Q. Okay. S A. Other than him telling me that it was a 5 A. I did not have them. 6 7 billionaire pedophile, other than him telling me about the flight manifest, I don't have a specific I 6 7 Q. You were told by Russell Adler that you didn't have — that you physically didn't have all the 8 recollection of what else he told me. 8 manifests, correct? 9 Q. Did you actually look at the flight manifest 9 A. That's correct. 10 at sometime, Mr. Rothstein? 10 Q. But you don't know whether they were in the A. Yes, sir. 11 building somewhere, these other supposed manifests? 12 Q. And what was it about those flight manifests 12 A. I have no idea one way or the other. 13 that you felt would help you pitch the Epstein case to 13 Q. You never asked for proof that Bill Clinton 14 the investor? 14 or Prince Andrew's name were on a manifest somewhere? 15 A. I don't remember who specifically was on it, 15 A. I didn't say that. I may very well have 16 but I remember it looking juicy. 16 asked Adler or Ken Jenne to find the other manifests. 17 Q. You don't know who was on it? 17 Q. Were you ever shown a manifest with the name 18 A. I don't recall. 18 Bill Clinton or the name Prince Andrew on them? 19 Q. Did you add any names to that manifest at 19 A. I do not recall one way or the other whether 20 any time? 20 I saw that or not. I remember Adler telling me about 21 A. I had — you mean physically write names on 21 it and then me repeating that information to the 22 there? 22 investors based upon Ms. Adler's representations to 23 Q. Any way you want to interpret -- did you -- 23 me. 24 not physically write any names on the manifest, but 24 Q. Now, you testified that you were told that 25 did you tell the investors that there were names on 25 the Epstein cases were "legitimate cases. Do you Page 106 Page 108 1 the manifest that were actually not on the manifest? 1 remember that testimony you gave this morning? 2 A. I told the investors that there were other 2 A. Yes. 3 people that appeared on manifests, I don't recall 3 Q. And you remember your testimony that you 4 whether it was that manifest or other manifests, and I 4 were told they were legitimate cases by both Russ S got the names of those people from Russ Adler. 5 Adler and Brad Edwards, do you remember that? 6 Whether or not they actually appeared on the manifest 6 A. I never said that Mr. Edwards or Mr. Adler 7 or another manifest, I do not know. 7 said, "Scott, these are legitimate cases." I didn't 8 Q. What names did you get from Russ Adler? 8 question than as to their legitimacy. 9 A. Russ Adler toldfne thaRill_Clinton flew on 9 Q. You did testify that you talked to Brad 10 Mr. Epstein's plane and that Prince Andrew flew on 10 Edwards about the Epstein cases; is that correct? 1.1 Mr. Epstein's plane. 11 MR. SCAROLA: No, counsel, that is a 12 Q. And is it your testimony today that you 12 misrepresentation of the earlier testimony. I3 never looked at the manifest to see whether Bill 13 MR. GOLDBERGER: No, it's not. 14 Clinton or Prince Andrew's name were really on the 14 BY MR. GOLDBERGER: 15 manifest that you were going to use to pitch the 15 Q. Did you talk to Brad Edwards about the 16 investors? 16 Epstein cases? 17 A. It was my understanding they didn't have all 17 A. I do not recall one way or the other. That 18 the manifests. 18 was my prior testimony, that's still my testimony. I 19 Q. Okay. Did you ever ask for the manifests 19 don't — I do not recall. 20 that purportedly had the name ofBill Clinton or 20 Q. We'll let the record speak — 21 Prince Andrew on it? 21 A. I know 1 spoke to Adler about it. 22 A. I probably did, but I don't have a specific 22 Q. We'll let the record speak for itself. Your 23 recollection one way or the other. 23 testimony, as 1 am questioning you now, is that you do 24 Q. When you say you didn't have all the 24 not recall whether you spoke to Brad Edwards about the 25 manifests, were all the manifests in your office — 25 Epstein cases; is that correct? Page 107 Page 109 28 (Pages 106 to 109) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 54493085-0554-447f-bcdd-ca2d8fe941dt EFTA01130762 1 A. If you are including within that me walking 1 A. She may have, I don't recall one way or the 2 past Brad in the hall and saying, "Hey, Brad how are 2 other. 3 you? How is the Epstein stuff going?" Then it's very t 3 Q. Did you ever ask Ms. Holmes to use any of 4 likely that I talked to him about it in that manner. 4 her prior contacts in law enforcement to assist you in 5 But I have no specific recollection one way or the 5 the Ponzi scheme to get information for you? 6 other as to having any lengthy conversations with 6 A. The question is kind of convoluted because 7 Mr. Edwards about the case. 7 the way you are asking it, it seems like you are 8 I had a co-conspirator who was deeply 8 intimating that Ms. Holmes knew. I may have asked 9 involved in the Ponzi scheme that I could go to to get 9 Ms. Holmes to get me information that I was going to 10 any information I wanted, Mr. Adler. I didn't need to 10 utilize with my co-conspirators in the Ponzi scheme, 11 go to Mr. Edwards. 11 but Ms. Holmes did not know that there was a Ponzi 12 Q. So if you had a question of your 12 scheme going on. 13 co-conspirator, Russell Adler, about the Epstein case, 13 Q. All right. So you may have asked Ms. Holmes 14 you would go ask Adler and would Adler always have the 14 to try and get some information for you from her 15 answer for you or would he say he would get you the 15 contacts in law enforcement, but it's your testimony, 16 answer? 16 and I don't dispute it, it's your testimony that she 17 A. Both. 17 knew nothing about the Ponzi scheme, correct? 18 Q. When he didn't have the answer, do you know 18 A. I may have, I may not have. I do not 19 who he was getting the answer from? 19 remember and she absolutely knew nothing about the 20 MR. SCAROLA: Objection, predicate. 20 Ponzi scheme. 21 THE WITNESS: I don't know who he was 21 Q. Okay. Now, we talked about Brad Edwards 22 getting it from and I may have contacted other people 22 getting paid and the multilevel ways in which you 23 in the office who were working on the file to ask. I 23 determined what a person's salary was. Do you know 24 may have asked Mr. Jenne,1 may have asked Ms. 24 whether Brad Edwards got any bonuses along the way 25 Holmes, I many have asked a whole myriad of people. 25 once the Epstein case was used as part of the Ponzi Page 110 Page 112 1 BY MR. GOLDBERGER: 1 scheme? 2 Q. So Ms. Holmes was working on the Epstein 2 A. He did not. 3 cases? 3 Q. So he was -- 4 A. It's my refreshed recollection from seeing 4 A. If he got a bonus, it was something he 5 one of those e-mails that she must have been. 5 earned. 6 Q. Okay. And Ms. Holmes you said was a former 6 Q. Did you make a determination as to what that 7 federal law enforcement officer, was that your 7 bonus would be? 8 testimony? 8 A. If he got a bonus, I would have been 9 A. Yes. 9 instrumental in determining it. You can determine if 10 Q. You don't know whether she was FBI or IRS, 10 he got a bonus by looking at our financial records, I 11 correct? 11 don't have an independent recollection one way or the 12 A. I don't remember. 12 other. 13 Q. Okay. And upon reflection, do you know 13 Q. So you don't know whether he got a bonus at 14 whether she was hired without your say-so based on 14 all, correct? 15 what Mr. Jenne told you or did you meet with her? 15 A. That's correct. 16 A. No, I actually -- I remember meeting with 16 Q. So I assume that if he got a bonus you 17 Ms. Holmes. 17 wouldn't know whether it occurred before or after the 18 Q. Okay. What do you remember about that 18 Epstein case was used as part of the Ponzi scheme? 19 meeting? 19 A. I don't know if he got a bonus, which means 20 A. I remember talking about her relative who 20 I wouldn't know the time frame. 21 was a judge. I remember her telling me about her time 21 Q. But we would learn -- you are instructing 22 in law enforcement. I just don't remember which 22 us, we would learn that by looking at when the Epstein 23 agency. 23 case was brought into the Ponzi scheme and we learn 24 Q. Did she tell you why she left law 24 that by looking at these -- what was the group that it 25 enforcement? 25 was used to pitch to? Page 111 Page 113 29 (Pages 110 to 113) FFUEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 56093085 0554-4471-beddca2d8k941dI EFTA01130763 1 A. Clockwork. 1 about? By the way, you had a number of Epstein cases 2 Q. So we would look at when the Clockwork group 2 in-house, do you know which case you were talking 3 was brought into this and the Epstein case was used 3 about? 4 then and then we would look at the payroll records to 4 A. As I sit here today, no, sir, I don't 5 see whether Mr. Edwards got a bonus after the 5 remember. 6 Clockwork group was brought into the Ponzi scheme. 6 Q. Was it a state case or a federal case? 7 correct? 7 A. I don't remember one way or the other. 8 A. From a timing perspective, yes. But 8 Q. All right. 9 Mr. Edwards had nothing to do with the Ponzi scheme, 9 A. I utilized all those boxes all I 10 nor was he rewarded even surreptitiously without his 10 don't remember which one I sold them. 11 knowledge for helping me with the Ponzi scheme. If he 11 Q. And the exhibits -- 12 was_rewarderLit was because he deserved, I felt he 12 A. It's something completely fictitious that I 13 deserved a reward, having nothing to do with the Ponzi 13 made iv that I told them. 14 scheme. The bulk of this law firm had nothing to do 14 Q. The exhibit that you were shown earlier, 15 with the Ponzi scheme. 15 Exhibit Number I, that's the long multi-page federal 16 Q. I think you testified already, though, that '16 lawsuit. Do you know whether that was part of the 17 money was fundable in the firm, right? I mean, you 17 information that you reviewed or shown to the 18 know, illegal money was used for legitimate purposes, 18 investors when you were pitching to them? 19 correct? 19 A. I do not remember one way or the other. 20 A. Yes. 20 Q. Okay. Now, did you make any effort to learn 21 Q. Okay. So, for example, investigations that 21 from your co-conspirator who the plaintiffs were in 22 were done with the Epstein case, it's very possible 22 this case, what kind of women they were? 23 that legitimate Ponzi money was used to finance those 23 A. Only that they were underage. 24 investigations? 24 Q. Did anyone tell you that these women had — 25 A. I'd be guessing. It's certainly possible 25 some of these women had a history of prostitution? Page 114 Page 116 1 because all the money went into a whole series of 1 A. They may have told me that I wouldn't have 2 pots, and if you look at, most of the pots were trust 2 cared one way or the other, 3 accounts. If you look back, you look to see what my 3 Q. Why would you not have cared about that, 4 CFO, who was also a co-conspirator was doing, she was 4 Mr. Rothstein? 5 pulling the money from wherever she needed to to fund 5 A. It had nothing to do with the sale of the 6 whatever she needed to fund. 6 Ponzi scheme settlements. MR. LAVECCHIO: Off the record a second. 7 Q. Okay. Were you told by anyone whether any 8 (Discussion off the record.] 8 of the women involved as plaintiffs in the case may 9 BY MR. GOLDBERGER: 9 have worked at adult clubs in the past? I mean strip 10 Q. Let me circle back to what you needed to 10 clubs, let's call it what it is. 11 learn about the Epstein cases to help make your pitch 11 A. I may have been told that one way or the 12 to the investors. 12 other. But again, it had nothing to do with the Ponzi 13 You talked about the manifest already, 13 scheme sale of fake settlements. 14 correct, the flight manifest? 14 Q. As pan of the information that you were 15 A. Yes. 15 told by you co-conspirator, Russell Adler, were you 16 Q. Okay. What else did you want to learn about 16 told that some of the plaintiffs that you had in-house 17 the case or what else did you learn about the case so 17 had travelled on Mr. Epstein's airplane? 18 that you were conversant when you spoke to the 18 A. I believe Russ did tell me that. 19 investors about the Epstein case? 19 Q. You know, in fact, that that was not true, 20 A. I recall asking someone what the causes of 20 correct? 21 action were. 21 A. I have no idea one way or the other, nor did 22 Q. Okay. Did you understand what they were? 22 I care. 23 A. I likely did at the time, I don't remember 23 Q. But your co-conspirator told you that, 24 what they were now. 24 right? 25 Q. Okay. Do you know which case we are talking 25 A. Mr. Adler did, in fact, tell me that certain_ Page 115 Page 117 30 (Pages 114 to 117) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 5ed93085-0554-4471-bedd-endale94141 EFTA01130764 1 of the underage women had travelled on Mr. Epstein's 1 have any knowledge of your firm's attempt during the 2 ae. I 2 Ponzi scheme to depose Alan Dershowitz? 3 Q. Did you ever meet any of the plaintiffs? 3 A. No, sir. I don't have a recollection of one 4 MR. SCAROLA: That's question that's been 4 way or the other. 5 asked and answered. 5 Q. Okay. The name Kendall Coffey was brought 6 THE WITNESS: I do not have a specific , 6 up before. Do you know who Kendall Coffey is? 7 recollection of ever meeting them. 7 A. Yes. 8 MR. SCAROLA: You are exhausting my 8 Q. Who do you know him to be? 9 indulgence. 9 A. Former U.S. attorney, current criminal 10 MR. GOLDBERGER: Fair enough. 10 defense lawyer. 11 MR. SCAROLA: You've exhausted my 11 Q. Was he a friendship of the firm's? 12 indulgence. 12 A. Represented RRA when I fled the country. 13 BY MR. GOLDBERGER: 13 Q. So he was a friend of the firm, or a friend 14 Q. Do you know whether any of your 14 of yours at least, right? 15 investigators at the firm had any kind of high tech 15 A. He wasn't a friend of mine. 16 surveillance equipment or, you know, wire tapping 16 Q. A friend of the firm? 17 equipment? 17 A. No idea. 18 A. I believe they did. 18 Q. He represented them when I fled the country. 19 Q. Do you know whether this was legal stuff or 19 I remember him coming in and doing like a show and 20 illegal staff? 20 tell in my office on TV. 21 A. I did not know, nor did I care. 21 MR. GOLDBERGER: Patience gets rewarded. 22 Q. Do you know if any of that stuff was used to 22 I'm done. 2 3 either wire tap or surveil Mr. Epstein? 23 Thank you, Mr. Rothstein. That's all the 24 A. I do not know one way or the other. 24 questions that I have. 25 Q. What sort of equipment did you know that 25 THE WITNESS: You are welcome. Page 118 Page 120 1 they had, meaning your investigators? CROSS EXAMINATION 2 A. I had told Mr. Jenne and others involved in 2 BY MR. SCAROLA: 3 the investigation arm ofRRA to get whatever equipment 3 Q. Mr. Rothstein, again, Jack Scarola on behalf 4 they thought they needed and to get the best stuff 4 of Brad Edwards. I want you to assume that Brad has 5 that they could ga. What they actually did, I can't 5 testified under oath that you never had a substantive. 6 tell you. 6 discussion with him regarding the Epstein case. Do 7 Q. You know as part of the Epstein litigation, 7 you have any basis whatsoever to question the accuracy 8 and I'm talking about now after your using it in the 8 of that testimony? 9 Ponzi scheme, do you know whether anyone at your firm 9 A. .1 ot_not. 10 attempted to depose ex-President Bill Clinton? 10 Q. I want you to assume that Brad has or will 11 A. 1 don't recall that, sir. 11 testify under oath that while you were copied op 12 Q. Okay. How about Donald Trump, same 12 e-mails, you never attended a single legitimate 13 question? 13 meeting regardinglhe legitimate prosecution of the 14 A. I don't recall that. Asa mailer of fact, 14 Epstein cases. Do you have any basis whatso—e-Ver to 15 we had represented Trump in some things, we had some 15 question the accuracy of that testimony? 16 pretty close ties with him, so I can't imagine that 16 A. No, sir. 17 they would have done that with my authority. 17 Q. I want you to assume that Brad has or will 18 Q. Okay. 18 testify under oath that you never directedrt ue filinp 19 A. I don't recall that. 19 of any documents in the Epstein case, including the 20 Q. Do you know whether Adler would have -- 20 July federal complaint that's been marked as an 21 would Adler have the authorize to do that without 21 exhibit to your deposition. Do you have any reason 22 getting your permission? 22 whatsoever to question the accuracy of that testimony? 23 A. The authority, no. Might he have tried, 23 A. No, sir. 24 yes. 24 Q. I want you to assume that Brad has or will 25 Q. Okay. How about Alan Dershowitz, do you 25 testify under oath that you never directed the takirur Page 119 Page 121 31 (Pages 118 to 121) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 543(193085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d8fe941d1 EFTA01130765 1 of a single depositionor the propounding of any 1 illegal activities at the RRA_finnancl you concealed 2 discover/ in the Epstein cases. Do you have any 2 your knowledge of Brad_Edwards' knowledge of that 3 reason to doubt the accuracy of that testimony? 3 illegal activity, what do you understand the 4 A. No. ir, 4 consequences of that false testimony to be? 5 Q. I want voile assume that Brad has or will 5 A. I'll be violating my agreement with the 6 testify that you did not provide any input whatsoever 6 Vnited States government and) would run the risk of 7 into the handling of the leititimate_Epstein cases. Do 7 dying in prison. B you have any reason whatsoever to doubt the accuracy 8 MR. SCAROLA: Thank you. I don't have any 9 of that testimony? 9 further questions. 10 A. 3:12,E. 10 THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir. 11 Q. I want you to assume that Brad has or will 11 MR. NUM: Mark, l don't know what your 12 testify that you_never met any of the legitimate 12 time frame is on your litigation, but the ability to 3 plaintiffs in the Epstein cases. Do you have any 13 receive the transcript, review it and prepare an i4 reason to doubt the accuracy of that testimony? 14 errata sheet within what is normally the time 15 A. 15 allotted under the court rules cannot be accomplished 16 MS. HADDAD: I'm going to object to these 16 in this case. 17 same questions you keep asking, because Mr. Rothstein 17 MR. GOLDBERGER: How much time are you 18 has testified at nauseam that he doesn't recall any 18 generally -- 19 of this and now you are asking him to bolster 19 MR. NURIK: I don't know. 20 Mr. Edwards either already given or purported 20 Actually, the first set of errata sheets 21 testimony when he's testified he doesn't recall it. 21 have just been prepared and finalized for the first 22 BY MR. SCAROLA: 22 deposition in December. I'm not suggesting it will 23 Q. I want you to assume that Brad has or will 23 take that long this lime, but if you can give me an 24 testify under oath that you never asked him once to 24 idea of what your time responsibilities are with the 25 report back to you on any factual matters regarding 25 court, what the time limits are -- Page 122 Page 124 1 the Epstein case. Do you have any reason to doubt the 1 MR. GOLDBERGER: Do you think it will be 2 accuracy of that testimony? 2 less than a month, two months? 3 A. No, sir. 3 MR. NURIK: I don't think it will be less 4 Q. I want you to assume that Brad has testified 4 than a month. First of all, a lot depends on the 5 repeatedly that he had absolutely no involvement in or 5 ability to get the transcript to him to review. 6 knowledge of any illegal activity engaged in by you or 6 MR. GOLDBERGER: Right. 7 any other RRA lawyer Do you have any reason to d bt 7 MR.NUM: And that's a whole procedure, B the accuracy of that testimony? 8 it's not normal circumstances that we are dealing 9 A. No sir. 9 with. 10 Q. I want to talk to you briefly about your 10 MR. GOLDBERGER: If time becomes an issue, 11 personal perceptions of the significance of the 11 well approach you and ask you to expedite. 12 testimony that you are giving today. If Brad Edwards 12 MR. SCAROLA: Mark, I will tell that from 13 had, in fact, been a participant in any of the illegal 13 our perspective time is an issue. 14 activities that you have been questioned about at any 14 MR. NURIK: Have at it then, lack. Do what 15 stage of this very lengthy deoositioa and you 15 you need to do to get it done. 16 knowingly concealed Brad Edwards' participation, what 16 MR. SCAROLA: There is a long pending 17 do you understand_theimonalssinsequences to be as a 17 motion for sununary judgment on Brad's behalf that has 18 consequence of your having knowingly concealed Brad 18 been delayed for purposes of taking this deposition. 19 Edwards' participation? 19 We are very anxious to be able to call that motion 20 A. be violating my agreement with the 20 for summary judgment up for hearing, so whatever can 21 United States government and I would run the risk of 21 be done reasonably to expedite the preparation of 22 dying in prison., 22 this portion of this transcript would be appreciated. 23 Q. If Brad Edwards, contrary to what you have 23 We understand there are limitations beyond your 24 testified under oath and what Brad hj_mself has 24 control, but to the extent you can do it, that would 25 repeatedly said, knew about anything having to do with 25 be helpful. Thank you. Page 123 Page 125 32 (Pages 122 to 125) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371.6677 Sed93085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d8fe941dt EFTA01130766 1 MS. IIADDAD: Ifs scheduled in a month, a HUMAN. LOMBARDI a OLSON 2 Mark. 2 Sew 914 Beare Butalute 1p W411 flag* Suess 3 MR. NURIK: We'll cooperate. 3 Morn rØ 33130 4 MR. SCAROI.A: Thank you very much. lettplatre (305)371-6611 4 5 [Thereupon, the taking of the deposition was Jed 21.3012 6 5 concluded at 12:37 p.m.) IN RE EPSTEIN VS EDWARDS 7 • SCOTT R0116TEIN 00 MARC NORM 8 One Ea, Brerweed Bakes/el Sarnia Nor re ~dole n011å• 33301 1. 0 NW SCOTT ROTHSTEIN SCOTT ROTHSTEIN WA24~o/ io the deer.m of 11 Sworn to and subscribed reuse gtaken hod R 2012, in ~IMO, vnia ihe abarneepotood urn, pion be atoned rho the before me this day ~cm of die *patron Ss tern cowered and 12 of , 2012. 12 • OW•110111 ~WC Notary Public, Stale Prerat anew sia slop by ow ant km 13 the peewee deaden tad sienna the *portion 13 of Florida at Large. Ow olio how. we 900 a rn .04 CO p . hØ 14 14 thous\ tidor Okra telephare a &hØ 15 You rara hovornr, rad a corn of de 15 trtnetot, petivrnd by any of Ow attorneys le erneocred %oh die erne, deans ay eorroment by 16 pert ad lee rrniarr on • mom{ lied fi pper 17 IT Tan Hernia" par ant be synd bt you and solicits and returned to ut b film watt** 18 1 need 19 19 laths hat nte tern taken tae of. leiwerna oohs no ant 30 de" ot by de erte of 20 20 ••t ~et eon's fro, I shell an eontludc dal die radio«. tokeenbine Ind rarne or stre 21 tow ben wood ard eel 'Sn weird co dearer 22 de enprat of tIe Irma° to ordenes attorney 7? *utall kids note< 23 23 24 24 25 25 Pearlyd: Mann Page 126 Page 128 1 CERTIFICATE 2 STATE OF FLORIDA I COUNTY OF S0MEDADE ) 3 Peadyck Masta a Notary Ptlabc in and 4 fa the Sate of Florida at Large, do hereby certify that burnout to a Notice of Talkie Orgasm°. m 5 the ebovbentnkd own. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN was by mc first duly cauuceed and swum to testify the wick 6 mah, ard upon being carefully examined testified as is beicirabove shown and la testimony of said 1 witness was reduced le eypnwital under my personal supervision and that the sal Video Conference 8 deposition eOntrirutel e true reidd of the testimony Lawn by the vorness 9 I funk' entity that ea said Video 10. Conferee= deposition was taken at the time and platt epeeilled hereinebow and Ran I am nett of 11 counsel mc solicitor to eider of She games in wad sun not aerated in the ram of the cause 12 WITNESS my hand and official sal in the 13 City of Miami Carty of Dade. Stale of Florida. this day oflwx IV 2012 14 15 16 17 Pearlsk Mania 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 127 33 (Pages 126 to 128) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 54:493085-0554-4471-bcdd-ca2d81.941d1 EFTA01130767