To: Lesley Groff...
From: Brad Edwards
Sent Thur 8/4/2011 2:58:29 PM
Subject Re: Jeffrey Epstein
I am available between 2 and 3 today.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
From: Lesley Groff
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 08:42:50 -0400
To: Brad Edwardse
Subject: Re: Jeffrey Epstein
Hello Brad. Jeffrey is asking if he may speak with you? Please let me know. Thanks, lesley
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 3, 2011, at 10:16 PM, Brad Edwards wrote:
Lesley,
Please pass this along to Mr. Epstein.
CONFIDENTIAL — FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY
Again, I agree that our previous discussions were productive. Or at least could
have been.... You expressed that you wanted to resolve both cases — (1) my case
and (2) the . You suggested a binding arbitration with a high/low
component on my case, and we discussed me putting together a proposal for
resolving the case after I spoke with my clients. I immediately attempted
to put your ideas in motion, but you apparently rejected the idea for the high/low
agreement that you proposed. So I stopped preparing the proposal on the
case because it appeared I was wasting my time.
As for the "insertion of my attorney", maybe I was not clear enough on the phone,
so I will say this as plainly as I can so that there is no confusion. Discussions
regarding my case cannot be linked to the resolution of the case for
obvious ethical reasons. That is why I turned over the finalizing of the settlement
on my case to Jack Scarola. To be absolutely sure the separate negotiations are
not inappropriately intertwined, I have given Jack complete discretion to resolve
the abuse of process claim on terms that I consider to be reasonable and based
upon the discussions that you and I have already had.
If it is the uncertainty of the proposal regarding theme case that caused you to
delay these negotiations by refusing to accept the terms related to the resolution of
EFTA_R1_00879389
EFTA02185307
se, then I will try to clear that up. As you know, you are not a party to the
ira case. That case is not about money; it never has been, it never will be. My
clients have absolutely no desire to settle this case. They want to fight until the
end to hopefully achieve some real justice, and we feel very strong in our position
in that case and believe that case will result in significant positive change for crime
victims. For me to ever recommend to my clients that they dismiss the
action, and for my clients to listen to such a recommendation, they would have to
feel that they accomplished something extraordinary for crime victims. With that
said, the general structure of any settlement on theme case would be pretty
straightforward and simple. It would only include the formation, participation in,
and funding of a crime victims- e Foundation. There will be no payment
provision to or any of the other victims, and no payment of
attorney's fees or anything like that; in fact, no payment to anyone other than the
Foundation. This is more than fair under the circumstances and completely in-line
with our discussions. However, until you or your attorney reach an agreement
with Jack as to how we are going to proceed on my case, there is nothing to
discuss on theme case.
Sincerely,
Brad Edwards
From: Lesley Groff [mailto:lesley.jee@gmail.corn]
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 5:15 PM
To: Brad Edwards
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein
Please see Mr. Epstein's message below.
CONFIDENTIAL - FOR PURPOSES OF SETTLEMENT
DISCUSSIONS ONLY
Brad,
I am truly sorry that we were not able to sit down face to face to continue our
discussions. This is especially so given the fact that I thought you and I had
agreed that our discussions were at last productive, particularly as there were no
other attorneys involved. Just by talking, you and I resolved both the DK and CO
claims in less than thirty minutes. So, I have to admit that I am disappointed at
your suggestion that I am somehow not acting in good faith. I was quite surprised
to have received a take it or leave it demand from Jack Scarola instead of the
proposal for a workable structure that we agreed. You and I have started a
constructive dialogue that I hope will continue. In that regard, I believe you might
EFTA_R1_00879390
EFTA02185308
want to consider the fact that you told me that your lost wages for billable hours
were approximately $250K. Additionally, you thought that pain and suffering and
damage to your reputation could somehow get you to a million dollars in damages.
You said that was without even considering punitive damages. At the same time,
however, you also suggested that you were unwilling to accept any confidentiality
obligations because you had already received an offer for a movie/book deal for a
million dollars or more. Moreover, you have already settled a number of cases
with me this year and are continuing to pursue the
case, so 1am unclear how you can continue to assert that your ability to
bring in new cases has been damaged or that your income earning potential has
been severely impacted. As you, yourself, said to me, the publicity alone cuts both
ways. All that being said, it appears that, with the insertion of your attorney,
things have come to an unnceccsary halt. I am awaiting what you suggested was
a thoughtful idea on the SI case. If you would
like to resume our dialogue in an attempt to resolve everything, please feel free to
call my secretary or Darren Indyke. Brad, I am sincerely disappointed that we
have come to this point so soon after we have been able to make some real
progress, but I hope to hear from you so we can resume our talks.
Sincerely.
Jeffrey Epstein
Sent from my iPhone
EFTA_R1_00879391
EFTA02185309