EFTA02726811

3 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF EKE 2 INDEX FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN ASO 1 WITNESS DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT FOR RAJA BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA 4 DR. BERNARD J. JANSEN (By Mr. Link) 5 -- 81 CASE NO.: 50-2009CA040 800XXXXNBAC (By Mr. Scarola) -- 68 -- 4 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, EXHIBITS FOR IDENTIFICATION Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, va @ Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 1 Page 5 SCOTT RCUHSTEIN, individually, - Curriculum Vitae and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually, Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 2 Page: 14 Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff. 10 - Report / II Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 3 Page: 31 - Appendix 12 VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 4 Page: 35 DR. BERNARD J. JANSEN 29 - Article Taken on Behalf of the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant 24 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 5 Page: 37 and Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff - Article 15 DATE TAKEN: Friday, December 1, 2017 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 6 Page 39 TINE: 9:23 a.m. - 11:21 a.m. 16 - Article PLACE: Law Offices of Edwards Pottinger, LW 27 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 7 Page 40 - Article 30 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 8 Page: 46 )9 - Article Exanlnation of the witness taken before: 20 plaintiff's Exhibit No. 9 Page: 54 - Article Mena Logo, Court Reporter 21 Palm Beach Reporting Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 10 Page: 59 22 - Article 23 24 25 2 4 1 APPEARANCES 1 - - - 2 2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Today is the let day of For the Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant: 9 3 De ter 2017. The time le 9:23 a.m. This Sc the LINK a ROCKENBACH, P.A. 4 videotaped deposition of Doctor Bernard Jensen in 4 BY: SCOTT J. LINK, ESQ. S the matter of Epstein versus Rothstein and Edwards. KARA B. ROCKENBACH, ESQ. 5 6 This deposition is being held a I 6 o Ily none Sc Robert Barfield. l'n the 7 For the Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff: 0 SEARCY, DENNY, SCAROLA, BARNHART 9 videographer from Visual Evidence, Inc. 4 SHIPLEY, P.A. 10 Would the attorneys please announce their 9 BY: JACK SCAROLA, ESQ. 11 appearances for the record? 12 Wt. LINK: Yoa. . 21 12 Wt. SCM01.1.: 11y sumo Is Jack Scare's. I'm Also Present: 14 00.20901 on behalf of the Plaintiff, Bradley 22 ROBERT BARFIELD, Videographor, Visual Evidence IS Edwards. And Mr. Edwards la also present. 29 16 RR. LINK: Scott Link and Kara Rackenbach on BRADLEY J. EL:BARDS, Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff 14 17 behalf of Mr. Epstein. 15 10 Mere.liSO4, Doctor Bernard J. Janson vas duly 16 10 swain.) 17 it, 20 Wt. SCAROIA: I'n going to offer a stipulation 19 21 co you. And that la that rather than go through 20 22 cho &mails of the witness' background, training, 21 22 21 and experience, we would agree chat his curricula 25 24 vitae will be worked es en exhibit to this 24 25 deposition and any portions of it soy be read by 25 Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726811 5 7 either party as if those entries in the CV wore A. Aa I outlined LA ay report in one of the 2 responsive to appropriate quoations during the 2 paragraphs that we can go through, I outlined explicitly 3 course of the deposition. • what the atatements were that I used. 4 MR. LINK: That's acceptable. 4 Q. 1 understand 'ihat a 'statement is. I don't MR. SCAROLA: Cood. Thank you. 5 have any problem with you doing research. The research 4 MR. LINK: Shall we go ahead and mark that as 4 that you did makes sane to ne. If you plugged in a 7 Exhibit 1? 7 ➢entente and wanted to ➢ee hem many tines it was u➢ed, MR. SCAROLA: That'a a good idea. a that ekes ➢anon to ne. iThecoupon, the docunent referred to was • A. Oh-huh. 10 marked Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 1 for identification.1 Is Q. I'm trying to under➢tand the language and the II TREREUPCM: II decision you mole about a statement being defamatory, 12 DOCTOR BERNARD J. JANSEN 12 andlwant to know how you madeadecisica that whatever 13 was called as a witness and, having been previously duly 13 statenere you were researching was a defamatory 14 sworn and responded 'I do,• was examined and testified 14 statenent. is as follows: 15 A. The defamatory statements was something that I 14 DIRECT EXAMINATION 16 was provided, as 1 state in my report, that it was these I BY MR. LINK: 1? stetenents that linked Mr. Edwards to the Panel velum, Q. Mr. Jansen, would you please take a look at le of Mc. Rothstein. That's what was provided to no. That I' what we Just marked as Exhibit 1 and tell ea what that 19 was my assignment. 20 is, 20 O. Okay. So you were told by either Mc. Edwards 21 This la my Cv, my curriculum vitae. 21 or Mc. Scarp'a what statement they thought was 22 And is that current through today? 22 defamatory. 23 I could chock every page. but it's a fairly 23 h. Those were the aaaaa',ant* I was told to look 24 recent CV. 24 for, yes. 25 Q. Okay. Mr. Janson, toll ma what your opinions 25 O. Okay. So did you nake any determination of 6 8 I are that you have reached in this case. 1 what's defamatory? 2 A. Tho -- my opinion is that the defamatory 2 A. No. 3 atatements against Mr. Edwards leaking into the Pony,. 3 Q. All right. Is there a way that you could 4 schema of Mr. Rothstein were disseminated to 74 4 describe the statement from your words what you were 3 different media sites, in 104 different articles, to 5 doing? Because the word 'defamatory' is not your word, I 9,665,542 daily media visitors. 6 la it, in this report? That's one of the layer's • Q. You just used the words •defamatory 7 words. • atataments.• Old you make a determination that there 8 A. Nell, it was a description I used for those • was a statement in ➢ome publication that was defamatory? 9 particular statements. It was provided to no, what 10 A. I was given the gist of the statements that -- 10 those statement, were. II the statements that linked Mr. Edwards to the Pons' 11 Q. Okay. So you chose the word 'defamatory 12 scheme of Mr. Rothstein, and than I chocked for the 12 statements'? 13 explicit statement, tho➢e particular statements in each Is I didn't say that, no. I w➢ provided that 14 of the 104 articles. 14 these are the defamatory aaaaarent* to look for. IS Q. I understand that, but I'm talking about the 15 O. Right. So the parson who nade the deci➢ion to 14 word •defamatory.• 1.3 label whatever statement➢ you researched defamatory was 17 •Defametory is a legal words is it not? 17 not you? 18 I don't know whether it'➢ a legal word or not. 10 A. Nhother they were defamatory or not was not my 19 51511, what does it moan? When you were doing is doci➢lon. re your work you said you used •defamatory statements.' 20 O. Okay. I➢ there something about my question 21 And I want to know what you concluded was a defamatory 21 that's cau➢ing you pause? 22 statement and we'll talk about -- 22 A. A little bit, yeah. I did an IT 33 Sure. 23 inve➢tigation. You're a➢king ne kind of a legal 24 -- the credentials you have to make that 24 question. 35 determination for -- to say that to a jury. 25 Q. Oh-huh. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726812 9 11 A. And I'm just telling you that I was provided 0. Okay. So then what aro the ➢ub-categories of 2 those statements. 2 opinion➢ thaw. you have? 3 And the reason I'm asking la you told ne your • A. Well, we can go over ny report but -- and I'll 4 opinion was about defamatory ➢tatementa. And that has a • provide those. 5 lot of significance to it. And I want to understand who • 0. 1 have your report, but I want you to tell no • detenined what statements were de famatory, whether you 4 what opinions you're planning to provide to the jury. / did that or the lawyers for Mr. Edwards did that. HA. SCAPULA: And you ahouid understand that • MR. SOMOZA: Objection, repetitious, asked • co the extent that It aaaaaaa you in providing an • and answered. • accurate response to any question that i➢ asked 10 A. Yeah, your question is asking kind of two to during the course of this deposition, you're free II question➢. II to refer to anything that you'd like to. 12 BY MR. LINK: 12 I have a copy of your report here. If you 13 You nay answer both. Co ahead. 13 want to look at that, you ere free to do that. As A. All right. The statements linking Mr. Edwards long as Mt. Link knows what it is you're looking Is to this Boost scheme by Mr. Rothstein, I noon, those 15 et, if it helps you to give honest and accurate 14 were statements I looked for. I looked for the explicit 16 answers, you're free to look at that. 17 statement, you know, those particular expression of 17 f0.. LINK: Jack, I don't agree to that. I 14 those statements. At -- the aspect of whether they were 10 don't want you to hand hin exhibits -- It defamatory or not from a legal aspect is not within my 19 KR. SCAROIA: l'n carry that -- 20 purview. 20 pt. LINK: -- and tell him whet he can do. 21 Q. Right. Okay. So that must mean that the 21 KR. SCAROIA: I'n aorcy that you don't 22 language •defamatory statement• was provided to you by 22 23 either Mr. Scarola or Mr. Edwards. 23 KA. LINK. I don't. 24 Noll, yeah -- yea, that particular subject 24 MA. SCUOLA: -- but that happens to be a 25 matter was provided, yea. 25 natter of law. Ka ha➢ a right to refresh hi➢ 10 12 Q. Okay. Ca you have any other opinions in this recollection to refer to anything that he wants to 2 ease other than the one you just shared with no? 2 during the course of the deposition as long as you 3 A. Well, there's supporting opinions that I 3 ace aware of the fact that he's referring to • outline in my report but that's the major -- that's what • something and have a chance to look at it yourself. 3 I was asked to do, dlasemination of those defamatory 5 KR. LINK: I don't want to ergue with you. 4 statements. 6 Please let ne take fly deposition the way I want to. 7 O. So -- okay, SO you keep saying •defamatory 7 KR. SCAROIA: You're free to do that. S statments.• And when you say that, the reason it • BY MR. LINK: 9 causes ne concern is whether a statement is defamatory 9 So what l'n asking la whet your opinions are. 10 la for a judge or jury to decide. 10 A. Oh-huh. IS A. Okay. Then maybe l'n -- 11 And we'll get co your report. And if you 12 You're not the judge or jury in this case. 12 don't remoter something, ju➢t toll ne you don't 13 I making that statement in a colloquial sense 13 rOffAabOr. 14 rather than the legal sons* you're using it in. 14 But, I want to know as you ➢lt here %tat IS O. So what we're really talking about, though, is IS you're going to tell the jury. And I understand opinion If a statement and how many times that statement wan picked 14 amber one i➢ that you took a statement given to you by 17 up by the press; is that right? 17 Hr. Edwards and Nr. Scarola and you did your research to IS The press -- yes, it was available on-line -- 10 ➢ee how many Lima you mad find it in the prem.; 19 O. Do you -- 14 right? 20 A. -- a particular typo of subject matter for 20 A statement, ye➢, or ➢imilar ➢tatmmnta that 21 these particular statements, yea. 21 related to it, yes. 22 Q. Right. Okay. And so whethor or not that 22 O. Cot lc. 23 statement was defamatory or not la not an analysts you 23 what other conelualona or opinion➢ did you 24 engaged Sn? 24 reach other than that one? 23 A. The defamatory part, no. 25 A. Nell, the other sub-supporting -- sub-opinions Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726813 13 15 that anymore that particular opinion. 1 with In deciding Mather you would bo retained in this 2 I'm asking what are they, air. 2 case was Mr. Scarola, not Mr. Edwards? 3 A. Okay. Well, that the statements were That is correct. 4 distributed to 74 different on-line sites, that I 4 Did you have contact with Mr. Edwards about S calculated the traffic to those particular altos. Tho 5 the content of your report? 4 sites that I couldn't verify the traffic or didn't feel 4 Yes. / I had reliable traffic numbers I didn't include. The And did you haws contact with Mr. Edwards • 104 articles, I looked through each of those articles • about what -- the way your report la written? s for defamatory statements, using that colloquially. I Well, yes, ho -- Mr. Edwards towhead a draft 10 outlined 12 different steps of why that is a 10 of the report. 11 conservative estimate, that 9,635,542, and give several II Q. And gave you comments on the writing of the 12 examples in my report. 12 report? Is Q. Okay. So that just sounds like the numbera 13 A. Yea, basically. 14 that you found when you did your singular opinion, which 14 Made some changes to it? Is la to see where this statement provided to you by the IS A. Made some suggestions, yes. 14 lawyers was replicated in the press, and that's the 16 Okay. And did you accept his suggestions? 15 number of times that you saw that; is that right? 17 A. Most of then wording changes, yes, and there 14 A. Noll, that was ono of my main opinion but you 10 was one recommendation that he asked if I could include Is asked for the sub-opinions and I've outlined it, that 19 in my report. 20 9,665,542 -- 20 And did you do that? ft Q. Yeah. 21 A. Yea. 22 was a conservative animate. 22 O. Okay. So you took his wording changes and you 23 okay. Any other opinions? 23 made a notarial change co your report based on 24 No can go through paragraph by paragraph in 24 Mr. Edwards asking you co de so: is chat right? 25 the report but I gave you the -- 25 A. He asked if I could include somothing and I 14 16 That's it? I felt it was in line, so yea. 2 -- broadest opinion. 2 Okay. So back to paragraph 9 for a second. 3 Okay. when wore you retained in this case, 3 The question that you were asked by Mr. Scarola and 4 air? 4 Mr. Edwards is: what is the level of diasomination of 5 By October 2017, on or about. 5 defaning statements? 4 MR. LINK: Okay. Let's go ahead and mark the 4 Did they give you any definition of what 5 report as Exhibit 2. • •dofaning• moans? S Intereupon, a brief discussion was held off 8 A. The -- again, this .defamingw La kind of a 9 the record, after which the deposition continued as 9 legal thing you're harping on here. I use it in a 10 follows:I 10 colloquial expression. And they gave ma what the Il IThereupon, the document referred to was Il statements I was to look for. 12 marked Plaintiff's Exhibit Umber 2 for identification.) 12 Right. So la the word "defaming• here really 13 BY NR. LINK: 13 superfluous from your standpoint? What you really 14 Q. Ready? Let's turn to page 3, air. On page 3 14 flooded wore the statements and not an adjective to 15 you outline what your assignment was. 15 describe them for you to do your work? If And who provided you with the assignment? who If For me to do my work? 17 gave you what's In paragraph 9? 17 Yea, sir. IS That would be Ns. Scarola. 18 A. I needed the statemanta to look for. 19 Mr. Scarola gave you paragraph 9? 19 So if the word 'defaming• wasn't in here it 20 Yeah. It's a -- and I added sone words to the 20 wouldn't have changed the way you wont about doing your 21 thing to sake it more in lino with what I had to do but 21 wort; would it? 22 that's basically just to looking for -- 32 A. Aa long as I had the statements, no, it 23 okay. 23 wouldn't change my work. 24 -- those types of words. 24 Q. Okay. Tarn to pogo 5, please. Look at 25 All right. So the person that you had contact 25 paragraph l5, if you would. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726814 17 19 1 Yes. 1 involved with Rocascain's illegal activities? 12 2 It ➢ays: •The defusing ➢tatements associating • that -- is that fight? ) Mr. Edwards with the illegal activities of 3 A. That Mk. Edward,. was involved with these • Mr. Rothstein...• • illegal activities and chat so -- you're writing it don 5 Do you see that? 5 like that was the only aaaaament I searched for. But, Yea. a as I said, in each of these 104 articles that verbiage what is the statement that you searched [or? 7 changed likely article co article. • Well, It was -- it varied slightly, you know, • Q. Okay. Well, Mr. dcarola corrected no and s docuaent to doctment, but it was an association with -- * added the word •knowing.• That's why I added he wo d 10 that Mr. Edwards was somehow knowingly involved with the 10 to My SOM01104.. 11 illegal activities of Mr. Rothstein. Was that not a word that was Srportent to you 12 what was the word search that you used? 12 in deternining whether the statement you were supposed 13 Nell, again, to find the articles or the 13 to find was included in en article? 14 statements in the articles. 14 A. I don't understand the question. 15 Q. I want to know the word search that you were 15 O. Nell, I just asked you if the statement that 14 Looking for. A9 I understand your assigneent, it was to If you were asked to locate to see how many tines it wee 1/ take the connection of Mr. Edwards with Mr. Rothstein 17 disseninated was the vex that reads like this: That 14 and Mr. Rothstein'➢ illegal activities and prepare a 10 Edwards was knowingly involved with Rothstein'a illegal Is report and identify ovary place that there was a 19 activity. 20 reference to Hr. Edwards and Hr. Rothstein and the 20 A. And I'n going to refer you to paragraph 15 21 illegal activities. Is that right? 21 that clearly states: Defaning statements associating 22 You're going to have to ➢ay that one sere 22 Mr. Bradley with illegal activities of Mt. Rothstein... 2) time. 23 O. Okay. So whether it was Mr. Edwards knew 24 Okay. 24 about it or not was not germane to your xaaaaaeh? 25 Sorry. 25 A. That's not what I laid. 18 20 Q. I thought I understood that the assignment Well, I just read what you wrote here and it 2 that you had was to simply take Mr. Rothstein, 2 just says associating him. It doesn't say whether he 3 Mr. Edwards, and the concept of illegal activities, and 3 know or didn't know. 4 then search and see where in the Internet, the • And I'm trying to really understand if you 5 newspapers, that combination of words exists. 5 wore looking [or articles that simply say: Edwards and • MR. SCAROLA: I'm going to object to the 4 Rothstein. And Rothstein has illegal activity. Or you 7 ntscharacterization of the an➢wer that was 7 were looking [or articles that said: Mr. Edwards was a S previously given, which included a reference to the S known participant in the Pearl scheme. 1 fact that Bradley Edwards was a knowing participant 9 MR. SCA/IOLA: Object to the fore of the 10 in the illegal activities. 10 question as it excludes the possibility that both 11 MR. LINK: Thank you for that clarification. II were included. 12 MR. SCAROLA: You're volcano. 12 1) Well, I can take your question two different 13 MR. LINK: Good coaching. 14 ways, okay. Ono, what I used to look at these Ia BY RR. LINK: IS documents, and those I outline in my report. IS Co right ahead. If BY NB. LINK: If A. I don't understand the torment about the I/ Oh-huh. 17 coaching. IS A. And than the actual statements in each of IS No, it was just for Hr. Scarola's purposes. IS these documents. And those atatomonta vary slightly, It okay. Could you repeat the question? 24 you know, article to article. But it was somehow there 20 Q, I probably can't. I don't reminder what I 21 I a➢ a reader of these articles would -- that the 21 asked now, but I'll cane up with another question. 22 article expressed that Mr. Edwards was ➢omehow knowingly 22 MR. SCAROLA: I'd be happy to help, if you'd 23 involved in these illegal activities of Hr. Rothstein. 23 like -- 24 Q. Okay. So is that the key to this? Tho 24 MR. LINK: No, no -- 25 article needed to show that Mr. Edwards was knowingly 25 MR. SCARCER: -- cause I resenber it. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726815 21 23 1 MR. LINK: -- I'll figure it out. With the illegal activities. 2 MR. SCAROLA: Okay. 2 COI IC. Okay. 3 MR. LINK: I'll figure it out. 2 All eight. Will you turn co page 13, please. 4 BY KR. LINK: • When you were identifying articles in which there MAO 5 I'm trying to understand what was important to 5 reference made to Nr. Rachstein'a illegal activities and 4 you in doing your search -- 4 Mr. Id.ards' lAVOIVeneht or Contribution to or knowledge 7 A. Uh-huh. 7 about those activities, did It matter co you where that. • Q. -- because I understand the number➢. That • infornacion cane from? * makes sense to me. That's sort of the easy part of And here is what I moan. Did you exclude, for l0 this. What I'm trying to understand la what you were 10 example, press statements by Mr. Scarola? 11 searching to find, so that I can then talk to you about 11 A. Nell, there's two questions there. Let me 12 whether the articles you located satisfy the ➢earch 12 deal with the last one. I mean, I don't recall any 12 request you wore soaking. 13 press -- looking at any press releases from M. Sterol., 14 Does that sake sense? 16 so I don't think I included those. is And when I read your sentence to paragraph 15, 15 Q. Now about statements to the press by 14 if that'➢ what you wore looking for, chon whether 14 Ht. Scarole? IS Mr. Edwards know or didn't know would not bo important )7 A. The -- well, let me answer your other 14 to you in your search. le question, which was -- which right now I forgot. Nah, I -- you know, well, you can argue and 19 Q. Okay. So let's deal with the question of when 20 interpreter it how you would like. But as I explain in 20 you were -- 21 my report, you know, I looked in those -- in the 21 A. Nell, I went to make sure I answer your 22 articles where that Mr. Edwards W➢ involved, knew 22 question. It was a -- it actually was a very good 23 about, contributed to, that somehow had to get across in 23 question and now I -- 24 these article➢ to me. 24 O. We're going to got back co it. 25 Okay. 25 RR. SCAROLA: Do you want the earlier coapound 22 24 So the exact -- yeah. 1 question reed back to you? 2 Involved, know about -- and I biased the third 2 THE WITNESS: Yes, the earlier compound 3 question reed back. 4 Involved, knew about -- 4 KR. LINK: Read it back. Saw about lt? 2 Somehow involved, is that what to was? 5 Objection sustained. 6 MR. LINK: Sack, do you remaabort 4 (Thereupon, the following was read by the 7 MS. ROCKENBACH: Contributed to. 7 Court Reporter: MR. LINK: Contributed to. 8 •question: All right. Mill you turn to page 9 MR. SCAROLA: Knew about. 9 19, please. Nhen you were identifying articles in 10 MR. LINK: Involved, knew about, contributed 10 which there was reference made to It. Rothstein's 11 11 illegal activities and Mr. Edwards' involvement or 12 MR. SCAROLA: Contributed to. 13 contribution to or knowledge about chose 13 MR. LINK: Cot lt. Thank you. 13 activities, did it matter to you where that 1• BY NR. LINK: 14 information cane from? IS Q. Okay. So -- ➢o then you were focused on not IS •And here is what I mean. Old you exclude, 14 Just that Mr. Edwards was employed at the Rothstein firm 16 for example, press statements by Mr. Scarola?•1 1* and that the Rothstein firm was involved in illegal 17 h. Yea to the first quostlon. Yes, it did matter IS activities. You wore looking for articles that 10 where it cats from. 19 connected Mr. Edwards to that illegal activity. lo BY NA. LINK: 20 A. That la a very good example. Yes, there were 20 Q. Okay. trplain to no why and what you did to 21 articles that, for exasple, said that Ns. Edwards was at narrow the field. 32 employed in Ns. Rothatein'a firm, and those articles I 33 h. For example, I ignored several -- chore's a 33 didn't include. It had to be somehow that he was 23 lot of docunonto -- court decumenta about this case that 24 somehow associated with this. 24 are available on-line. I didn't link those bells. You 33 Q. With the illegal activities? 25 know, I Just hit -- I -- Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726816 25 27 Q. You did not? atatenenta or articles or interviews were created 2 A. Specifically court documents, no, I did not 2 by Mr. Edwards or Mr. Scarola, those are still 3 include those. • included in the realer of hens you identified with 4 They're, identified in your report, the court 4 atatenenta?•) 5 docunenta. a BY MR. LINK: Where are they identified? O Q. Okay. bac so ask the question again. I think 7 Okay. We will look at that. 7 MO elated a couple of words. Let me sea if I can break 4 So you excluded court documents? • it down. Yea. Now, if -- the only disclose -- just to So let's take It then -- for exisple, the 10 clarify that, if an article referenced a court document 10 first article listed on page 13. Do you see that that's 11 or had a snippet free a court dominant, you know, like 11 en October 6th, 2017 article? 12 [rem a news article, than I included it. But if it was 12 A. Nell, I Just want to -- that's a -- this Se a 13 just, you know, about none Florida Court Association 13 search result, a snippet linked to en article. 14 repository, no, I didn't include those. 14 O. Right. And I assume that that article that's 15 All right. Any other limitations? 15 referenced here is one that you included es a hit in 14 They -- if, far exanple, there ware articles 16 looking for a statement, that's why you're showing it. If that just mentioned the case -- I? A. Nell. no, because in Figure 1 I lust give -- is Oh-huh. le trying to explain what I did in tent of search *marlin. It -- but didn't mention that -- had the 19 I would have to check that particular link, if I 20 statements about Mr. Edwards being involved In these 20 included that first link in my report. 21 illegal activities, I didn't include those. O. Nell, this -- okay, so all you're doing in 22 There may have bean soma other exanpies. But 22 this example, and maybe I read it wrong, is it says: 23 my real -- my real aspect was to focus on sone type of 23 Figure 1. 24 explicit publishing of chase statements. 24 This is Figure 1, I thinks right? 25 Q. All right. And so I take it than that you 25 A. That is correct. 26 28 1 were not eliminating articles that, for example, it 1 Q. Geogle search peewits for search: edwards 2 Mr. Scarola or Mr. Edwards spoke, to a reporter which led 2 epstein Pearl scheme. 3 to an article being written or they invited a reporter Right? 4 to a hearing or had lunch with a reporter to talk about 4 A. Yee. a the case, which created an article, you didn't exclude 5 Q. So these are the items that popped on that 4 those free your analysis? 6 search, and then you would read the article to see what MR. SCAROLA: Excuse me. • it said? Objection, no proper predicate, and compound. O A. Yea, these are the first -- well, these are 9 BY MR. LINK: 9 the first five articles from that particular query. And 10 Q. You can answer it. 10 then I'd open into the article and then read what the II A. In each ar the 104 doctoonta I looked for the 11 article said. 12 expression of the statement that linked Mr. Edwards to 12 Q. Okay. And were you provided any parameters 13 these illegal activities. 13 from Hr. Scarola or Nr. Edwards for the time frame that 14 Q. So that if -- so that if soma of the 34 you ahould search for? 15 statements or articles ar interviews ware created by 15 Prom then specifically I was not provided with If Mr. Edwards or Mr. Scarola, those are still included in 14 a tine frame. 1, the number of item you identified with statements? 17 Q. Okay. Did they ask you to limit your search II MR. SCAROLA: Objection, no proper predicate, 10 to the time period that Hr. Epateln'a Complaint against 15 2ASU002 facts not in evidence, no good faith basis 19 I . Rothstein and Mr. Edwards was pending? 20 to suggest such things over happened. 30 Not explicitly, no. 21 Can I have the question back? 21 Okay. Did you limit your search to that tine 32 MR. LINK: Please. 32 period? 33 (Thereupon, the following was read by the 23 Yes. 24 Court Reporter: 24 All right. So that your search should not 35 "position: So that IC sane of the 25 contain any articles that go peat 2012? Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726817 29 31 That is Incorrect. Okay. You have an appendix co Exhibit 2, 2 All right. So then you did search for 2 which is your written report in this case, that 3 articles that came into existence after dr. Epstein's 3 identifies -- 4 Complaint against Mr. Rothstein and Mr. Edwards was 4 1G. SCAAOLA: Did you nean to give me this S dismissed? copy? A. Let me -- let me go back. I misunderstood KR. LINK: I meant to. your question. KR. SCAROLA: Oh, okay. Oh-huh. • 1G. LINK: I anent to. And the reason I did All right. I -- the lawyer talk of •claims,• • is all of chase articles aro going co correspond co 10 •counterclaims,• is throwing me a little bit. I did it the actual article itself, Jack, so we can Lie than 11 from the original lawsuit from Mr. Epstein against II in together. 12 Mr. Rothstein and Kr. Edwards and ono other person. 12 hen. SCAROLA: Gat it. Thank you. 13 Oh-huh. 13 ml. LINK: Let's go ahead and fork this 14 So, yeah, that's what -- when you said the Exhibit S. 13 •lawsuit• that's what I was -- IS (Thereupon, the document referred to was 14 0. So you !carted your search December lth, 2009. 16 mocked Plaintiff's Exhibit Rusher S for identification.) 17 That's when the lawsuit I7 BY KR. LIME: 1• Correct. 18 Q. All right. we're looking et Exhibit S, which la -- was filed. And when did you and your 19 la the appendix to the written report you prepared In 20 search to look for articles that would have been related 20 this oases is that right? 21 to that lawsuit? 21 A. Yea. 22 Tho -- well, I stopped searching In around 17, 22 Q. And under Reports and Articles Referenced, 23 19, October. So I included every article that I ran 22 those aro the reports and articles that you found 24 into. 24 contained the statemant about Mr. Edwarda and 25 And were you aware when you dad your search 25 Kr. Rothstein and illegal activities: is that right? 30 32 1 that the Dec➢nber 7th, 2009 lawsuit was dismissed in 1 A. Nell, no, not exactly. 2 2012? 2 Now do I have it wrong? 3 I don't know exactly what you nean by 3 A. These reports and articles ere articlea that I 4 aaaaa.4 But in articles I've read, I read the • referenced in ny report as footnotes and things like 3 lawsuit was no longer pending. 9 that to support the textual things I'm writing. 4 0. And that -- was that information that the 6 Q. Nell, were there additional articles that you 7 lawsuit was no longer pending in 2012 Important to the 7 did not list in your report that you reviewed that • gathering of the articles that contained information 8 contain the statement that you were searching for? 9 about Mr. Edwards and Kr. Rothstein? 9 A. Yea, there were. 10 Mr. -- for what I had to do, no. 10 Okay. So I thought I heard you say that there Il Okay. Do you know the tine period that 11 were approximately 109 articles you reviewed. On here 12 Mr. Edwards filed his counterclaim against Mr. Epst0in, 12 it lists 121. Mich of th0 109 articles that you 13 when that happened? 13 reviewed that contain the statement have you not 14 Except for hove, no, I do not. 14 identified in your appendix, sir? IS Did it influence any of the research that you Nell, ono correction. It's 104. If did that Mr. Edward➢ filed a public counterclaim lawsuit la 104. Thank you. 17 against Kr. Epstein within 30 days of Detests[ 9th, 12 And I do include the 104 articles. IS 2009? is So then when I asked if every article char. 19 I -- again, all the lawsuit stuff I don't Is Included the statement about Mr. Rothstein and 20 know. 20 Kr. Edwards and illegal activity that is part of your 21 All right. Did you find any articles between 21 calculation, if it was included In the appendix, the 22 December 7th and when mar. Edwards and his lawyer, 22 answer is ye➢? 23 Kr. Scarola, filed their counterclaim lawsuit against 22 A. Nell, that's not the question you asked me. 24 Kr. Epstein? 24 If you're asking re if all of those articles are listed 25 A. I have no idea what that mean➢. 25 here in Appendix C, then the answer is yes. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726818 33 35 Okay. Croat. So let's start with item number 1 RR. SCAROLA: No. 2 2, which is -- 2 RR. LINK: LWa go ahead and mark this as 3 MR. SCAROLA: Could I make a ➢ugge➢tion? o Exhibit 4, please. 4 MR. LINK: Yes, sir. 4 (Thereupon, the docunent referred co was 5 MR. SCAROLA: Because I think maybe you're a 5 marked Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 4 for identification.) little bit confused and It might be helpful if we 4 THE WITNESS: Can I stand up and get ny water? • clarify ➢omething. MR. LINK: Absolutely. MR. LINK: Please. MR. SCAROLA: Pant to take a short break? MR. SCAROLA: There's a separate appendix that o Nave been going for about an hour. Ie appears at page 87. You are referencing an is IRE WITNESS: Yeah, that would be good. It appendix at page 79. THE VIDEIRMAPRER: The time is 9:59. going 12 MR. LINK: Yeah. 12 off the record. II MR. SCAROLA: It's the list that begins at 13 (Thereupon, et 9:59 inn. a recess was taken II page 87, which is specifically labeled Links to 14 until 10:04 a.m., after which the deposition continued II Articles Containing the Defaming Statements. 15 as follows:1 14 Do you see that? 16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 10:04. We are MR. LINK: Yeah, but those are not the i? bock on the record. IS articles. 18 BY MR. LINK: MR. SCAROLA: If you're going -- 19 Q. All right. So Jansen Exhibit 4, which 20 MR. LINK: Those are just links to them. You 20 correlates to number 2, is this an article that contains 21 can't actually get the article from doing that. We 21 a statenent in it that you then looked to see how many 22 tried. 22 touches or how many people logged an to read it? 23 MR. SCAROLA: Well, okay, I'm just ➢ugge➢ting 23 A. I don't know. I can check it, if you want. 24 to you that maybe -- 24 Q. Would you please? 25 MR. LINK: I understand. 2s A. I don't see a stater:ant. 34 36 MR. SCAROLA: -- maybe you want to clarify the 1 Q. Okay. So this would not be an article then 2 relationship between Appendix C and Appendix D. 2 that would he included in your limbers? 3 You night be -- you night be able to focus 3 A. If it doesn't contain the statement no, it 4 on where you want to go if you do that. 4 would not be included in the number. 5 MR. LINK: I think I'm okay. 5 Q. Could you explain to me why it's cemented 4 MR. SCAROLA: Okay. • upon in your written report if it doesn't contain the 7 MR. LINK: This la the only way we can get the • statement? • articles up because they were not attached. 8 A. Again, beck to this section here. These are 9 THE WITNESS: I provided all the articles. 9 reports and articles that were actually referenced an vy 10 MR. LINK: Right. Some of then -- actually, 10 report as citations for some statements. This is not 11 sane I got, sone were not there. 11 the list of articles that contain the defaming 12 THE WITNESS: No, I provided hard copies -- 12 aaaaamama. I) electronic copies of every single ono. 12 0. 1 understand that, but you told ma all 104 of 14 MR. LINK: To? 14 then aro listed in this section of the appendix. IS THE WITNESS: Someone from your law firm who is A. No, I did not. It's in Web Page Printouts 14 contacted me. Ic section of this appendix. In MR. LINK: Okay. Well, we printed them. It 17 So if I turn in your report to page -- IS doesn't really natter. I think we have them. So IS Kt LINK: Mr. Sterols is going to help ma. 19 we will go through them. 1, 161. SCAPULA: 8?. 35 And we're looking at number -- 20 BY 1G. LINK: 21 what are we on, 4? 21 0. -- 87, that's the list of articles: is that 22 THE COURT REPORTER: Uh-huh. 22 right? 23 MR. LINK: *Mich should have a number 22 A. IC's actually in two places. I have it in 24 corresponding to number 2 on here. 24 that appendix with a nice List of each of the articles 25 iiek, did I give you an article? 25 and the domains. And then I eLso have it in Appendix C Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726819 37 39 hero in Nab Page Printouts, which is a different section 1 I grabbed the screenshota for each of these articles and 2 of this appendix. 7 provide the link in the report and an actual screenshoc 3 Nob Page Printouts. 3 of the article in the collection of documents in ny 4 Okay. So if I go to Nob Page Printouts those 4 report chat was provided to, I guess, both attorneys. 5 are the articles? NR. LINK: All right. Okay. Let's mark this Yea, air. 6 as the next exhibit, Exhibit 6. 7 Okay. Good. That helped. All right. So I'm (Thereupon, the document referred co was • on the right appendix, wrong place. • narked Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 6 for identification.) So it starts with what I have numbered as 10. * BY MA. LINK: as Okay. Q. This Exhibit 6 -- I'll do It a different way Q. Very helpful. Thank you. 11 now. This Exhibit 6, does that correlate to the as A. Yea, sir. 12 handwritten nunber 18 on page SO of Exhibit 3? 13 Q. I don't have 18 here but I have 19. So let's 12 A. Nell, the WI is not here but the title is the 14 take a look at that. 14 same. So, I roan -- yeah, the title is the same. The to MR. LINK: Lot's go ahead and nark this as IS UAL la not here, so I can't say for sure it's the exact 14 Exhibit 5. 16 sere article but the title is the sane. 17 IThareupon, the document referred to was 37 O. Okay. Md is this the article that you would Is marked Plaintiff's Exhibit Mwnber 5 for identification.? 18 have reviewed? is BY KR. LINK: 19 A. I can't remember all 104 articles. But, like 20 Q. Okay. So Exhibit 5 correlates on page 80 to 20 I said, the Urn, is not here, so I can't really say for IL the handwritten number 19. 21 sure, but the title is the same. 22 MR. SOASOLA: Aro you testifying? 22 Do you see this -- 23 MR. LINK: No. I'm making sure that -- I'm 23 NA. SCAMLA: Lac me also point out that what 24 not. I'm making sure that you understand what 24 you have narked as Exhibit Number 6 clearly is only 25 we're looking at. as a portion of this article. 38 40 MR. SOAAOLA: Because that didn't sound like a 1 NR. LINK: Oh, I understand that. l'n just question. 2 trying to make sure we've got the right articles. 3 MR. SOAAOLA: It's not. It's to make Sure 3 NR. SCAROLA: Okay. Kell, you don't have the 4 that the record is -- 4 right article if all you've narked is a piece of A. I don't think I've seen this before, this 5 the article. We know that that's the case. 6 particular printout. • Correct? BY NR. LINK: 7 NR. LINK: I'm not asking him to ccanent on 8 You haven't seen this article? 8 the article. Just if I've got the right -- 9 No. 9 BY NA. LINK: 10 All right. 30 0. Is this the -- forget what all of the IL I don't recall seeing it. 11 Information contained in the article. le this the 12 Okay. So then if you haven't seen it, then it 17 article, title and author that is -- ties into 13 would not have bean rereferenced in the data that you 13 handwritten number 18, if you can toil? 14 collected? 14 A. Yeah, to be really honest with you, I can't 15 Noll, this article. I moan -- IS tell because the ML is not here. You know, the title IB Okay. to is the same. 11 -- this link is 19 so -- 17 NA. LINK: All right. IS Okay. Md then you don't believe that this le Let's nark this as Exhibit 7. 19 article that is marked as Exhibit 5 is the article to Is (Thereupon, the document referred co was PO that link? 70 marked Plaintiff's Exhibit Nuaber 7 for identification.) 21 I can almost toll you it's not. 21 BY MA. MU: 22 All right. 22 Q. Exhibit 7 is an article from the New York 23 I can explain that, if you'd like. 13 Peat, October 5th, 2017. Does that tie -- is this the 24 Sure. Go ahead. 74 article, if you look at the top, pressresder.ccm, that 25 A. Yeah, this Preasheader la -- I included all -- 25 ties into handwritten nutter 19? Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726820 41 43 A. Yea, the URL la the same. This looks like one information they were quoted on included ono of the 2 of my screenshota. So I believe this ties into number 2 statements you were looking for? 3 19 that you've annotated on this appendix. 3 A. I can't -- I wasn't specifically looking for 4 Q. Okay. So is this one of the articles that you 4 that. I can't recall. • located that contained the atatemont you were searching • Q. Okay. So who made the statement was not 6 for? 4 important to you, simply that the atatomenc existed? 7 I recall -- I recall this particular article, That it occurred within the article; correct? • so yea. • And since this one wet in 2017, that's about All right. And what is the atatemont in hero • five years after Mr. Bpstelea lawsuit against 25 that you found to fit the description of what you were 10 Mr. Rothstein -- against Mr. Erhard was dismissed; 11 looking for? II right? 12 A. If I recall this correctly, I believe it was 12 A. I don't know. 13 paragraph 6 that -- 1, 2, 1 -- excuse. mm, paragraph 5 is 13 Q. Nell, you know that 2017 is five years more 14 why I included this. 14 than 2012? II Q. Okay. Anything else in here? 15 A. Yes. I can do the meth. Is A. The article included at least ono statement. 16 Okay. Then was the first article that you 27 I moan, I can read the entire article but looks like 37 found from -- l'n talking about from a timing la paragraph 5 there not my criteria. le standpoint. What is the date of the first article that 19 Q. Okay. And you say that this article cane out 19 you found that contained one of the statements you were 20 in October of this year, just a couple of months ago? 20 looking for? 21 Yea, I see that. 21 A. I can't recall. 22 All right. And do you know where the 22 Q. Is there something you can look at that will 23 information for this article came from? 23 toll us the date of the first article chat cane our chat 24 A. The. Nov York Post. 24 contained the statement chat Mr. ScaroLa and Hr. Ectearda 25 Q. No, I understand that. I mean for Lia as asked you to find? 42 44 I Euatachowich, the author of the article. A. Nell, if we had all the electronic copies of 2 A. I didn't investigate whore the reporter or -- 2 the articles we could look at the dates that they were 3 Or the source or where the information cane 3 pUblished. 4 from or who she spoke with? 4 Q. Do you have something with you that you can • A. No, I did not. 5 look at? 4 Q. Do you know whether there are any quotes in 6 A. I don't have -- I provided -- I provided those 7 any of the articles you reviewed that wore made by 7 particular documents, so I don't have then with me. 4 Mr. Epstein? 8 O. You didn't keep a copy or on your computer or 9 MR. SCAROLA: Separate and apart from 9 anything? 10 Mr. Epstedn'S statements in the Complaint? 10 A. Oh, yes, I have it. Il MR. LINK: Yea. I'm asking about the article. 11 You have It? 12 MR. SCAROLA: I'm just asking to clarify the 12 I have the d0cuents). I) question. 13 Okay. So is there a way of looking at this 14 BY KR. LINK: 14 appendix or the report to determine the very first tine 15 Q. Did Mr. Epstein give any quotes in any of the 15 and which article you wore able to locate one of the If articles that you researched? 14 statements you were searching for? 17 Well, I wasn't looking for that, so 17 Not by looking at the report, no. IS really -- I don't know. le when you go through -- when I'm looking at 19 Q. Did Hr. Epatein'a lawyers give any quotes in 14 this report I see dates on here, a lot of 2O17a, 2015. 25 any of the articles that you researched? 20 Can you identify one of these char has a 2009 31 A. I can't say for sure but there seem to be 21 publication date? 32 plenty of lawyer quotes so -- 22 I moan, I can look through each of these 104 33 Q. I agree shore are loco of lawyer quotes. I'm 23 URLs, if you want me to. 24 asking if Mr. Epstein's lawyers, not Mr. Edwards' 24 95 lawyers, Mr. Epstein') lawyers were ever quoted and the 25 A. I don't know. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726821 45 47 Q. By taking a look at your appendix can you make. 1 And then: 'Weird& worked at...• 2 that determination? 2 O. Okay. So what la It in paragraph -- 1'n going 3 Well, lot no look at the URLa. 3 to put a bracket -- would you put a bracket around the 4 Okay. 4 two paragraphs for so, please? Or just identify than 5 Now, just -- you know, a lot of those l/RLs 5 with a star, however you want to, so we know which ones I don't have dates. 4 we're looking at. • Q. I understand. In looking at what's available (Witness complied.) • to you today can you find ono of those that Oxlatood in • Okay. The first paragraph, what is it in that s 2009? 9 aaaaa nem or in that paragraph contains the statement is A. Noll, lot no look. 10 that you were searching for? it MR. SCAPOLA: Have you done the search of 11 A. Nell, '...alleging the attorney was involved 13 Because if you've done it and you tell us 12 in false claims made by Pond. schemer Scott Rothstein. • II that it's not there for 2009, I'm willing to 13 And then explains the illegal activities. iw stipulate to that. 14 And then on the next paragraph it addresses Is By MR. LINK: IS Edwards as being the attorney -- 14 Co ahead. You can keep going. 16 O. Okay. I/ No. Based on the URLa -- looking at the URLa I? A. -- that the previous paragraph referenced. Is I cannot coma co an article free 2009, if I recall the 10 O. And this was a 2011 article, April 22nd, 2011? is que➢tion correctly. 19 A. That is the date. 20 Okay. And in looking at the URLa can you toll 20 O. And In what paper was this article written? 21 me how many of those articles were in existence before 21 A. Based on the URL, the Palm Beach Daily News. 22 2012 when the lawsuit against Mr. Edwards vas dismissed? 22 Q. Are you faniliar with that newspaper? 23 A. Nell, I could go through and look at then 23 No, I'm not. 24 again but it'➢ probably just very ➢inllar. And to kind 24 Do you know what its subacription is, the 25 of outline, in ny reports, you know, there aro certainly 25 number? 46 48 I documents that are no longer available. 1 A. I can look at ny report. 2 Yeah, looking at these URAL. no. 2 O. Okay. Where in your report does it say that? 3 All right. Shank you. 3 A. Yea. On page 17, ranter 62, Palm Beach Daily 4 aloroupon, a document was marked Plaintiff's 4 Hews, daily traffic 8,320. 3 Exhibit Number 8 for identification.) 5 Q. Okay. I'm sorry. I was distracted. Can you 4 BY KR. LINK: 6 do that one note time for ne? I apologize. 7 Q. Exhibit 8 I bellow ties into handwritten • A. Yea, sir. Page 17. 8 number 20. 8 Pape 1?? Could you take a look and see if I have that 9 A. And there's a table at the top. 10 right? 10 Uh-huh. Il Bo far I think I'm about 1 for 10. Maybe 2 11 And item number 62. 12 for 10. But definitely not making the Nall of Fame. 13 Yeah. 13 The URL la cut off but this looks like what 13 The Palm Beach Daily Wows. Is that the 14 you have annotated here as number 20. 14 correct? And than 0,320. IS Q. All right. And this is an article that you Is All right. So is that the nuvber of hits that If have included a➢ one of the article➢ that contain➢ the 14 were on this article en June -- on April 22nd, 2011? 17 statement about Mr. Edwards you wore searching for? 17 A. That's the daily traffic that that particular IS correct? is site received. It Yes. Is On that day? 30 0. Can you show no where the aaaaa sant la that 20 Well, it's -- as I said In ny report, they 31 caused you to select this document? 21 typically have sore -- you knew, it's average over a 32 A. Paragraphs 7 and B. 23 week or month or something like chat. It's typically -- 33 Q. Paragraph 7 that starts with the words: 23 there's now. -- you can't look at a particular date. 34 •Edwards worked at...• 24 O. Over what period of tine did you consider? So 25 A. No. •Ep➢tein filed its original lawsuit..." 25 this is an April 22nd, 2011 article. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726822 49 51 I A. Uh-huh. 1 calculation, so I did the average. 2 Q. What time franc did you consider In 2 All right. So you cane up with doing the math 3 determining 8,320 people reviewed this article? s 8,320? 4 The -- I went to Slmilarlfeb, went to the • Correct. appropriate time period and then got the daily unique And that's the approximate number of people traffic. 6 that logged into the on-line site? And so for that time period there wa➢ an Or visited that particular site. • average daily traffic for the paper or for this article? • Or visited that particular site. A. As I explained in the report, for the paper. But it's hitting the site, not this article? Is For the paper? le A. That is correct. It The vebsite. 11 Q. All right. So you can't tell me hew nany of 52 So how many people on April 22nd, 2011 read 12 the folks that logged on to the Palm Beach Daily News en 13 thi➢ article? 13 April 22nd, 2011 actually even reed the article about II That's what this number provide➢. The exact la It. Epstein and Br. Edwards? Is readership nunbers are not typically available for the IS A. I did find out exact readership is difficult 14 individual article➢. 16 to nearly irpossible, especially when it cones to 1/ Okay. Can you tell me of the 8,320 people 1? on-line newspapers and things like that, because the way la that looked at Tho Shiny Sheet during sone period of l• people read. It time in April 2011 how many actually read this article? 19 Q. I understand that. So isn't my statenent 20 The -- let ma kind of go back. I thought you 20 true, you can't tell ne how nany people on that day 21 were referring to the palmbeachdallynews.com, not this 21 actually read this article? 22 Shiny Sheet. 22 A. No, that's not exactly true. What -- I think 23 But thi➢ particular -- these numbers are used 23 the way to look ac this muter is this is an 24 for the particular readership. So lt would be -- a way 24 approxinatIon -- a good approxlmatlen of the readership, 2S of looking at it would be this would be a max but a 25 and It specifically addresses try particular assignment, 50 52 1 conservative number on the number of readerships. I which was to valor a dassenination of these particular 2 Q. Okay. Lot's try this again. As I understand, 2 statements. 3 there were 8,320 people approximately because you did an 3 Q. Well, as a palm of your assignment, as I 4 average based on sons period of [Imo' right? 4 understand it, the number you cane up with would be the A. Well, it's not I did an average. That'➢ S number of individuals who this intern:Mica was 4 typically how it's do ne if you're looking for a 6 disseninated to. / particular period, you know, there. Because, especially 7 A. That is correct. going back this far, you know, it'➢ typically available 8 Which means they had to reed It; right? for a month or a given period. So these traffic 9 If it's going to Insect pie and l'n going to 10 services, they do the averaging many [loos. IS torn en opinion about Hr. Edwards based on that read, if 11 Oh, ao the 8,320 was provided to you by a II I don't read it, then is hasn't impact my view of him. 12 service? 12 Bo you agree with that? 13 Well, yes, I use -- it's ono of the traffic 13 A. IL depends what you near by • read.• 14 services I use. 14 Well. if I don't read chla article, I don't IS Q. And so the date -- the question I'm asking Is: IS sea the statement., do I? If Did you take a month of information, and then -- let's is Well, If you -- you know, I gem many e -nails 1/ assume there were 30 day➢ in it, and total that up and 17 from different newspapers and I go to different 18 then divide it by 30 -- l• newspaper site➢ and a lot of tines there will be mini IS Yeah. la stories on the pages and I'll read the headline and the 20 0. -- to get an average? 20 snippet from the particular paragraph and then road some 31 A. That would be a way daily traffic is 21 stories. 32 calculated. 22 And so -- but you're asking a question that I 33 Q. But did you do that or dad you pull it Cron a 23 was not asked to actually investigate, the exact 34 service is what I'm asking you? 24 readership of these particular articles. I was asked 33 A. I be lieve similargeb gives a monthly 25 the dissemination of theca particular statements. And Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726823 53 55 1 that was ny 9,669,542. I articles were from the same 'Mesita, I just included one 2 Q. But you're not telling ua that number of 2 traffic number. 3 people actually road any ono of these atatementa; are • O. Okay. So was It your assunptIon that the 4 you? 4 exact same number of people chat looked at the April 5 The exact readership, no. 5 22nd, 2011 article looked at the October 20th, 2013 Okay. And you can't toll me as you sit hero 4 article? / today how many people actually road this article, • A. Ic could have bean more. It could have been • Exhibit 8, dated April 22nd, 2011; can you? • less. It could vary day by day a little bit. • A. I could say it's -- you know, the number that Only a little bit over a tun-year period of 10 were dialeminatod to was 8,320. But, no, I can't say 10 time? 11 the exact readership of that particular article. II A. I did not look -- we could look at e Q. Okay. And you can't tell me the exact 12 particular site but if you look at -- if we can look at 13 readership of any of the articles that you located; can 13 the table, I wean, this particular newspaper published 14 you? 14 seven different articles on this that contained the I'm going to go back to my role as an export. 15 defaming statements. I only counted one and so used one 14 I moan, this is not like counting loose change in your 16 unique physical period. 1/ pocket. I moan, it's -- there's multiple -- there's 1? O. Okay. So you just used the tern 'defaming 14 traffic numbers. And so these -- these particular le statenente again. Is that because that's what you were Is traffic numbers are what's used in the industry for 19 told by Mr. Sterol. and Mc. Edwards? 20 readership in audits. 20 A. l'n using that as a way to look at it as naybe 21 Q. So lot me try ny question ono sore time. 21 some shorthand for the statements that were set forth in 22 Sir, you can't tell ne the actual number of 22 the articles. 21 people that road any ono of those articles that you have 23 O. Okay. So really what you were looking for 24 identified, can you, sir? 24 were statements, without giving chow any color, is that 25 A. Although, as I tried to explain, but on the 25 right, or characterization? 54 56 1 technical aspects of it but, no, the exact readership, 1 A. The statements that associated Mr. Edwards. 2 2 with Memel activities. That's what I'm looking for. 3 Q. Take a look at this next one. 3 So I'm just trying to figure out the 4 MR. SCAROLA: Exhibit number 9? 4 thoroughness of what you did. TEE COURT REPORTER: Yea. S A. Sure. 4 MR. LINK: Yea, sir. 6 Q. So I understand that in 2011 you looked at a 7 ITToroupon, the document referred to was 2 month of log-ca activity and then divided that number by a marked Plaintiff's Exhibit Nuidser 9 for identification.) O 30 to case up with 0,000-some-odd muter that we looked 9 BY RR. LINK: 9 at; right? 10 Q. All right. If I have done this right, Exhibit 10 A. Nell, I calculated the unique daily visitors. IL 9 I believe correlates to item handwritten =door 21. II Again, this particular webalte that you're pointing out 12 Okay. Lot me chock. 12 pubilished seven different articles. 11 Yea, it looks like this is that particular 13 Yes, sir, buy. not -- I apologise. I oust be 14 article. 14 doing a lousy ).213 of asking questions and communicating 15 All right. Can you please toll re the number 15 today. I thought we had really hartnered this h0222, If of hits on October 20, 2013 to the Palm Beach Daily News 14 which was that in 2011 you personally went to a service 17 on-line paper for that day? 12 and got 30 days of hits on the Pals Beach Shiny Sheet IS Nell, there was wo just looked at that. It 10 m01,0124 -- 19 was 8,320. 10 Yeah. 20 Q. And you told me that was for a month period of 20 -- and then did the nach? 21 time in 2011. Thin is two years later. So l'n 21 That's correct. 22 asking -- you're not telling us that two years later the 22 You didn't do chat In 2013? 33 exact sane nunbor of people wore touching the web:site; 23 Let ise -- let me -- I see where you're getting 24 are you? 24 at now. 25 A. The -- in ay report if an article -- multiple 25 So, yes. Teak, for the particular sites that Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726824 57 59 1 published multiple articles, yeah, I can't renambar the 1 But I can look -- 2 exact particular date I nod in this ono. They had 2 Q. So in doing your search if you found a 3 seven different article➢ published on those ➢tatements, 3 statement then you would atop reading the article; is • so I ignored ➢ix of then and just used one occurrence. 0 that correct? 5 Okay. So you ignored then. I got it. A. I didn't say that. I Just said I would Let's take a look at Exhibit 9. 0 include it if it contained the atatamant. Can you clarify that statement? I don't 7 Q. Did you read the entire. article once you • understand by •I ignored them.• 0 identified a statement? You don't understand what? 1 sonatina I did. Sonatina I did not. 10 Your aaaaa neon. to Okay. Than you go, air. 11 Which atatement, sir? II irherewpon, the document referred to was 12 The statement that ➢aid I ignored than. And I 12 marked Plaintiff's Exhibit Munber 10 for 13 want to ;rake sure that you understood my response 13 Identification-1 14 correctly. 14 BY RR. LINK: Q. I think you used the word •ignored.• That's 13 Q. Lot's look at Exhibit 10, , and I 14 what you said, you ignored -- you looked at ono and 10 believe this ti➢s in with handwritten item 23. 1/ ignored ➢ix. That'➢ what you said. 17 Yea. Okay. rs Okay. So you sea this as an August 2012 If MR. SCAROLA: The record will reflect what the Is article -- 20 testimony was. 20 Yea. 2l Tilt WITNESS: Yeah. 2L -- that was In the Palm Beach Post? 22 BY RR. LINK: 21 Yea. 23 That's what you said. 23 And this article announces that Mr. Epstein 24 So let ins -- 24 has dropped his suit against Kr. Edwards; correct? 25 You don't like that choice of words by 25 A. Says: •Billionaire sox offender drops...• 58 60 1 yourself? 1 'Billionaire sex offender drops suit against 2 If you're focu➢ing on that particular word -- 2 Scott Rothstein and one of hie pa rtners.• Yes. 2 well, you know what, you're right, I guess I did 3 Q. Okay. Can you tell ne in this article that • ignore -- I dad ignore six article➢. 4 announces that Mt. Edwards is no longer a defendant in That's what you aald. 5 the lawsuit brought by Mt. Epstein what is the phrase 4 Yeah. that you isolated or located to fit your search? Okay. So now let's look at this article. 7 A. Let ne read the article. Sure. 8 Oh-huh. 9 What statement in Exhibit 9 dld you identify 9 A. Yes. That would be the combination of the 10 that met the parameters of your search? 10 first three paragraphs. 11 I b➢ileve. it would be paragraph 9. 11 Okay. And turn to page 2, if you will, of the 12 okay. Will you put a star by the paragraph? 13 article. This l➢ in October -- I 'n sorry, August 2012; 13 fWitneas complied.) 13 Correct? 14 One, two, three, four, five -- the ono that 14 Yea, August 2012. 15 starts with •Aeons...• 15 All right. And do you see Mr. Sterols quoted If Yaa. 14 In chla article? I/ Okay. Any other statements in ham? 17 A. Yea. 18 MR. SCAROLA: Could we read that into the t• p. And do you see where Mr. Searola says: 19 record? Sorry. 10 •Despite throe years of crying, Epstein never produced 20 MR. LINK: That's an exhibit in the record 20 any Ovldirft04 to share up hla allegations, said attorney 31 already. I don't think we need to read it. 21 Jack Soarola.• 22 BY NR. SCAROLA: 22 Yes, I see that. 33 Were there any other atataments in here? 23 Okay. And you toe Mr. SearOla in the next A. Well, I can read the rest of the article. but 20 paragraph is voted as well that; •We...' 1106111119 23 if the article contained ono ➢tatement I included it. 25 Epstein, •...filed these baseless, scurrilous...• -- and Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726825 61 63 1 that's a word only Kr. Scarola could gat out of his KR. LINK: I'll cake that. 2 much in an articulate way -- for the purpose 2 KR. SCAROLA: I knew you would. 3 of trying to extort Hr. Edwards into abandoning the KR. LINK: That was really good. 4 lawsuits on behalf of Hr. Epatein's young attorney 4 Did you write down the next question? That S Na1c1?• Do you see that? • was excellent. That was excellent. Oh, Hr. Epatein'a young victims. THE WITNESS: You two have a relationship • Q. Young victim. Thank you. 7 here. • A. Yes, I see that. • KR. LINK: For 30 years. Some days good.: none MR. SCAROLA: So that the record is clear, the • days bad. Depends on how we're doing. 10 first paragraph attributes a statement to me but to THE WITNESS: Yeah, chat's a long It it's not a quote. Agreed? 11 relationship. 12 MR. LINK: Yea, air. 12 KR. SCAROLA: It's more a moment by moment. 13 MR. SCAROLA: But the Second paragraph is a 13 KR. LINK: I think it is a moment by moment, quote. le but always very such in respect of this gentleman. 15 MR. LINK: I agree. The second one la a IS THE WITNESS: That's right. That's the way it It quote. 16 should be. MR. SCAROLA: Although I would acknowledge the If BY KR. LINK: IS atatamant attributed to ma la at leant an accurate IS Q. So let we try that again. If ammary of what I said. 19 KR. LINK: Did you write that down? 20 MR. LINK: Sounds like something you would 20 KR. OCAROLAi Na, I didn't, but it's on the 21 say. SI record. 22 MR. SCAROLA: It does. 22 A. I think I follow that. 2) MR. LINK: I agree. 23 BY Now. LINK: 24 BY NR. LINK: 24 0. Okay. 15 Q. Did you take into consideration when you ware 25 h. I just looked if the article contained the 62 64 I looking at articles after August 2012 the fact that I StatenentS that I was looking for and whether whatever 2 Mr. Scarola had publicly denounced what Hr. Epstein had 2 0190 was in the article. 3 done and said to the world that Mr. Edwards was free and 3 Q. Okay. Did you do any research to see what • clear of any taint or allegations essentially that • impact the atatesunts had on any of the readership? 3 Mr. Epstein brought? No. 4 MR. SCAROLA: I'm going so object to the 4 Did you de any research into whether -- what 7 question as compound. 7 opinions were feigned about Hr. Edwards by anyone who S I was going to say, you kind of lost me on the • read any of the articles? 9 main point there. 9 A. 10 By KR. LINK: 10 Q. Did you de any research into whether the II Let me try it again. impact on the readership in farming an opinion about 12 So there are two statements in here that are 12 Mr. Edwards was different after Mr. Scarola made his 13 attributed to Hr. Scarola and one direct quote. Do you 1) statements in 2012 to the press? 14 agree with that? 14 A. No. IS A. Yea, I agree. IS Q. When you did your research did you Interview If Q. And Hr. Scarola la making it clear that what If any readers that actually read one of the articles that It Mr. Epstein filed against Mr. Edwards had absolutely no I/ you cite to In your report? IS basis' true? IS 19 A. Y09, that seems to be the point taken. 19 0. Can you quantify the total number of people 25 Q. And did you take into consideration when doing te that have read any one singular article about 21 your Internet research that on August 17th, 2012 there 24 Mr. Edwards, just one article out of all of the ones 22 was a public statement by Mr. Edwards' lawyer that he 22 that you have identified? 23 had essentially been -- 23 I don't understand quantify. 24 MR. SCAROLA: Successful In discrediting 24 Yeah, you found 104 articles -- 25 Mr. Epetelfen Charges. 23 Correct. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726826 65 67 Q. -- right? Can you identify ono parson that 1 with hin on another -- on chat ease. 2 actually read ono of the 104 articles? 2 O. Well, it's a case chat you list with 3 I didn't look for a parson, so no. Mr. Edward's name on in your rOlUTO; isn't it? • Okay. • A. Yea. That's %tat I neat.. Be kind of 5 Noll, beyond ne. 5 originally retained M but then went to another law Noll, you road chain as part of your • firm, SO I just didn't understand. 7 assignment. O. Explain corm what you roan by that, please. A. That's correct. • So Mr. Edwards originally retained you and then that How many hours did it take you to locate all 5 happened? 10 of the articles? 15 A. Then a different law firm -- I kind of dealt 11 I can ballpark it. 11 with a lawyer °loose exclusively from a different tiro. 12 That's fair. 12 So, you know, I dent know -- I listed them both. 13 17.25. 13 Q. All right. Md what work were you asked to do That's a ballpark? 14 in that case? IS Yea. Because [heron also sone other stuff IS A. In that particular case I was asked to -- It going on there. 16 and so I had to 17 Q. Bo's bettor than you. I? look up the dissominatica of those particular statements is MR. SCAROLA: He's a scientist at ballparking. l• on-line. Is BY KR. LINK: 19 O. So you were essentially doing the awe work in 20 Q. 17.25? You can't get it a little tighter than 20 that case for Kr. Edwards that you're doing in this case 21 that? That's is good as it gets? 21 for Kr. Edwards? 21 I had to eliminate .20110 tiros that I wasn't 22 A. Other than the statements being different, 23 actually looking for articles. 23 It's very similar. And there were some other things in 24 Q. 17.25. Md how many hours in total have you 24 this particular CASS. 25 spent in developing your opinion that you're providing 25 O. l'n sorry, I didn't understand you. 66 68 i today? A. What I'm saying there were a few other things 2 In developing the opinion? For today? 2 but the basic process and procedures watt the same. 3 Up through today. I ialaUlia -- 3 Q. Okay. And the stetenent that you were provide • • in the case, was that -- that you were supposed -- you can't talk about the future. 5 to research, was that provided to you by Kr. Edwards? • Yeah. I said I billed 17.25. And than, you 6 A. Not by Hr. Edwards, no. 7 knew, I did -- read some -- re-road my report and stuff O. By his co-cconsel? for deposition, so it would be three or four tore hours. 0 A. Mother lawyer involved in the case, yes. 9 9 NR. LINK: All right. I don't have any other 10 20, something like that. 10 questions. II 2O-something, okay. 11 Jack. 12 And you charge how nuch an hour? 12 CROSS EXAMINATIfel 13 $400. Is BY NA. SCABOlA- 14 All right. Do you have any other opinions 1• O. You wore asked questions about articles that IS that you're working on in this case? 1a quoted um and whether you had seen any articles chat If A. In this case, no. 16 quoted defense counsel. Co you recall that? 17 And you have worked as an export for 17 A. Yes, I recall that. IS Mr. Edwards before; correct? I• 0. C.C. back to tchlblt MUIVbar 9, if you would, It Yea. 15 please. 20 Q. In what caso was that, sir? 20 Yea, sir. 21 A. That was the case. 21 In this exhibit chore is in paragraph 4 a 22 Again, it was a little -- I don't know. Yeah, 22 direct claims attributed to WO -- 23 the whole lawyering, how you lawyers handle this. I 21 Yea. 24 don't understand. 24 correct? 25 But, yes, as a lay person I would say I worked 25 A. I see that. Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726827 69 71 Q. It aaya, quote: •This has been a long tine That would to a taken, yea. 2 coming, and we're extremely anxious to have the Or at least after cho scheduling session? 3 opportunity, for the first tine, to lay out in detail Yeah. 4 the terrible nature of Jeffrey Epstein'➢ serial abuse of 4 Whether the conversation took place in the 5 Sevens and dozens of children,• unquote; correct? 5 courtroom after the mum proceeding or outside the A. Correct. 6 courtroom, this report -- 7 O. It's not possible to make a determination from Yeah. a what's included in this article whether that quote was • -- suggests that the lawyer was speaking to from a atatemont made in court or out of court; is lt? 9 the press after the court proceeding. Not to mm, no. lo And is goes on to say, quote. •'so it's going II Okay. 11 to take a lot of prospective aurora to find somebody 12 Going down two more paragraphs it roads: •At 12 that doesn't already have en opinion In regard to some 13 a calendar call on Friday, Crow told lawyers for both 13 of the people involved.'• Correct? 14 sides that he would have to specially sot the trial le A. Correct. Is because of several factors: its estimated length, 'Mr. 15 Q. Okay. Then we have the specific paragraph 14 Epstein'➢ criminal issues,' Penn-scheme allegations 14 that you identified as a paragraph that qualified this 17 surrounding Edward➢' former tom, and the expected 19 article for inclusion in your count; correct? la length of the time it will tate to select jurors.• 18 A. Correct. It I want you to assume that the •Crow• that is 19 And if we go down to the bottom of the page, 20 referenced as la described in 1, 2, 3, 4 -- the fifth 20 we then have the following statenent, one paragraph up: 21 paragraph is Circuit Judge David Crow. Okay? 21 •Fred sodded. Epstein's attorney, declined to my 22 okay. 22 whether hie client will be in the courtroom and/or 23 The nowt quote that appears is a quote from 23 whether he will testify.• 24 the Judg➢ himself, quote: •'With Kr. Scarola doing the 24 Then we have a direct quote attributed to 25 voir dire, it's going to take a long time to get through 25 another one of Mr. bpstemes lawyers, according to this 70 72 1 the process,' Scarola said.• 1 article, Fred Wadded, quote: •'We're defending this and 2 So we know that the Judge is being quoted as 2 we'll mete decisions based upon what the plaintiffs do,' 3 well; correct? 3 Wadded paid. 'Then you're on the defense, you have to 4 Uh-huh, correct. 4 see what the offense does first. The trial will be very I And It is probably a reasonable -- 5 interesting. There are a lot of legal issues as well as 4 MR. LINK: And I second the statement by Judge 4 factual issues.'• 7 Crow. Did I reed that accurately? MR. SCASOLA: Both you and Judge Crow aro 8 A. It peened accurate to me, yea. 9 likely accurate in that regard. 9 Okay. So going back to a question that was 10 BY MR. SCAROLA: 10 asked of you by Mr. Link earlier, he asked to whether 11 Q. But, apparently chore's some court proceeding 11 there were quotes from Mt. Eptcoln's lawyers in any of 12 that was going on at which the Judge mad* this 12 the press articles, we have now confirmed that in at 13 statement, reasonable a➢sumption? 13 least this one article, two of Mr. Epacein'a lawyers 14 A. Reasonable assumption based on chose two 14 were both ➢peaking co the press outside the courtroom; 15 paragraphs, yeah. Is correct? If Q. Then the next paragraph roads, quote: •'The 10 Correct. 1/ people involved aro pretty well-known,' said Chester 17 Okay. Did you actually read each of the 104 IS Brewer, one of the Bpatoin's attorneys, after the 10 articles that you were able co identify to be sure that 19 scheduling session.• 19 there was a ➢catmmnt included in each of chose 104 20 Do you see that? 20 articles chat linked Bradley Edwards to participation in at Yea, I see that. 21 Scott somateinis massive Penal scheme? 22 So, we know, assuming the accuracy of this 22 A. Yes. I read either the entire article or up 23 report, that Mr. Epacein'a lawyers wore speaking or one 23 to the point whore I found this stateroom. 24 of Mr. Epstein's lawyers was speaking to the press 24 0. All right. So Mr. Link has gone through a few n outside the courtrooni correct? 25 of those, and l'n not sure how he °elected the ones that Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726828 73 75 he selected, but he's gone through a few. But if we I 9,665,542. The first is that obviously I couldn't 2 were to go through each of these 104 article➢ you would 2 locate all the articles by the time I filed my report. 3 b➢ able to identify a specific atatement that associated 3 So there's certainly articles out there that I haven't 4 Bradley Edwards as a participant in this mealy* Ponsl 4 located by the tire I submitted th0 report. I only 5 scheme; is that correct? 5 looked at on-line sources. I didn't deal with prints or A. That's correct, I did it. 4 broadcasts or anything like that. I didn't • Q. Y➢u have reached the conclusion that that • Q. So, for example -- and I apologise for • Information was disseminated to an audience of over 9.6 • interrupting you. But one of the websites that we've • million people; correct? 9 particularly focused on is the Palo Beach Daily News, A. Correct. 10 also phone as The Shiny Sheet. But what you looked at II Q. Did you cone to a conclusion as to the II were electronic accesses to their website; correct? 12 likelihood of whether the actual number of individuals 12 A. That is correct. 13 to whom that statement was disseminated exceeded 9.6 13 0. You did not include the number of individuals 14 million people? 14 who subscribe to that newspaper and have it delivered to IS MR. LINK: Object to the form. 15 their hone; correct? Well, yea, as I -- 16 A. That's correct, I did not include those. MR. SCAROLA: I'm sorry. Before you answer 37 Q. You didn't lock et the number of tines that IS the question, what's the problem with the form? 18 people went to their local retail store and bought a If MR. LINK: It assumes that -- the way you 19 copy of The Shiny Sheet? That's not included in your 20 aakod that readers actually saw the aaaaaneat 20 calculations; correct? 21 versus it being disseminated in the web page that 21 A. Correct. 22 people touched. He testified he could not identify 22 O. And the sane would be true with regard to each 23 who in fact or the number that saw the aaaaasent. 23 of chose wwb➢iter. which also has a corresponding hard 24 MR. SCAROLA: Okay. Well, I think you've 24 copy publication, the Palm Beach Daily Mews, the -- 25 mlscharacterised my question, but just to ba ➢ure 25 excuse no, the Paln Seidl Poat, the Sun-Sentinel, the 74 76 let no make sure that I ask the question in the way I Miani Herald, The Hew York Tines, or any of the other 2 I intended it to to answered. 2 periodicals that have both herd copies and website 3 BY I . SCAROLA: 3 access; correct? • Q. Can you tell ua whether the conclusion you 4 A. Correct. 5 reached that those ➢tatements were aaaaaa'skated to an • Q. Okay. So you were describing the reasons Irby 4 audience of 9.6 million people is a conservative - 6 your number of distributions is conservative and I MR. LINK: Same objection. 7 interrupted you. So pick up, if you would, please. 8 BY RR. SCAROLA: 8 A. Yes. I also didn't include atatenents in the 9 -- conclusion? 9 book Filthy Rich that wee distributed, written by 10 Yes, it's a conservative -- very conservative I4 Mr. Janes Patterson. II number as I outlined in my report. 11 Q. Okay. There was an exhibit marked that made 12 Q. And describe [or the benefit of the jurors, if 12 reference to that book. That was Exhibit Amber 4. And 13 you would, please, why it is your opinion that the more 13 While this exhibit makes reference to the book, it is 14 than 9.6 million number to which you have testified is a 14 not one of those articles that contained -- Exhibit 15 conservative assessment of the number of people to whom 35 Bunker 4 is not an article that contained an express It these statements were disseminated? 14 reference to the relationship between Bradley Edwards 11 Okay. 17 and the Rothstein Ponsi scheme; correct? IS MR. LINE: Object to the form. A. That's correct. 19 I think to address this properly if I can just 19 O. But do you know whether the book itself 24 refer to my report -- 20 contains express references to allegations that Bradley 21 By all moan. 21 Edwards was a knowing participant LA the Ruud scheme? 22 -- as the best way to address it. 22 Yes, I know it does. 23 Well, I had like 12 reasons why I took a very 23 Okay. But you didn't include any of those 24 conservative approach to the dissemination number 24 James Pettef64a books that were sold in hard copy, that 35 calculation. So likely much -- much more than 25 got distributed through electronic means or wound up as Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726829 77 79 audio books? Noma of that's included; correct? A. Aa I mentioned -- talked about this in ny 2 A. Correct. 2 report. They wore typically sites that were very, very 3 Q. And obviously you don't know how many tines 2 large or very small. • people who bought that book loaned it out to their • So like, you know, some the larger sites, it's spouses, their friends, and neighbors, so that they 5 that -- maybe I'll give you a good example here. Like 4 could read it; correct? • the pressReader, for example, that la a alto that • A. Correct. 7 present* a lot of articles from a lot of different • Q. Okay. I have been given a notice that we are • newspapers. And so the traffic numbers that I was • almost about to run out of tape, so we'll break right * getting wore, you know, very inflated I felt, so I did 10 there. We'll take a short break; lot then change the 10 not include those numbers. II tape. On the other sites, there ace a lot of bldg lx THE VIOZOORAPNER: The tine la 11:04. We're 12 sites end stuff like that from individuals that didn't II now going off the record. 13 get a lot of traffic. Again, I felt that those traffic II 4Theroupon, at 11:04 p.m. a recess was taken 14 numbers were not reliable or I couldn't get then, so I is until 11:11 a.n., after which the deposition continued 15 did not include those. 14 as follows:) 16 Okay. Continue, if you would, describing -- If THE VIOZOORAPNER: The tine la 11:11. We're 1? A. Yea. IS back on the record. Thi➢ la the beginning of Tape I8 O. -- the basis for your assertion that the 0.6 IS 19 million dollar numbers -- excuse me, the 9.6 nillion 20 fl int. SChROLA: 20 number is a conservative number. 21 Q. At the point at which we took our break you 21 A. Yea. I didn't include sites that hod articles 22 ware describing for the benefit of the Jury why the more 22 where they didn't have the statements but a link to an 23 than 9.6 million nunber is a conservative estinate of 23 article that had the atatementa. So unless it actually 24 the number of people to when the statements that you 24 appeared exactly in the article, I didn't include it. 2S have identified were distributed, acknowledging that 25 So Allet410 could be at a different alto, follow the link 78 80 whether they road them or not to not something that I end could actually see it, but I didn't include those. 2 you've looked at, but these were people to whoa they 2 Many of these sites publish multiple articles 2 were distributed. 3 on multiple different days that contains the statements. • So why -- why else do you consider the number 4 And there is an aspect of return readership. So I 5 to be a conservative number? • didn't want to double-count traffic, so lust to make it • A. Yea. I didn't Include any face-to-face 6 very conservative even if they pUblished seven articles • dissemination of people talking about the State/MASI. 1 7 or five, I only counted it one time. So I didn't count ▪ didn't include any private on-line correapendence, like O the multiple days. • o-mall, and stuff like that. 9 And then also aearch results. Saw of the 10 There are more than likely altos that had the 10 queries that I AS using, you could submit the query and II atatomenta that I can no longer access. And, actually, 11 you could see the actual aaaaa rent* In the search 12 I ran into a few of those. I just couldn't get the 12 results. You didn't need co go co the site. 13 article, the activities, a few things like that. So I 13 So, like m ny report on page 21 1 give sere 14 didn't include those. 14 examples there that just enter a query and you see the IS Of these 74 sites that contained the article, 15 actual statements in the search results. You don't even If I only included traffic for 58 percent of then because 14 need co go co the site co -- I moan, you don't even need I/ the traffic number for the other sites -- the other 43 17 to technically read the article. You just like search IS sites I just didn't feel comfortable that the numbers 10 and type in the query. 19 were valid. So of the 74 sites -- of that 9.6 million 19 Q. Did you AA into account In any way AM 24 plus, even though the article -- I know the article was 20 multiple individuals maybe accessing the altos 21 posted on the 74 altos, I only included the traffic for 21 simultaneously? Comm on over here and take a look at my 22 SI percent of those sites. 22 monitor and see what's being reported about Brad 23 Q. And why did you con➢ider the other traffic 23 Edwards. 24 numbers not to be reliable? What distinguished those 24 A. No, I did not include those. 25 from those that you felt were sufficiently reliable? 25 Q. And what about the private forwarding of Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726830 81 83 webalto information, did you take that into account at O. No, the statement➢ from the lawyers. 2 all? 2 Mr. Scarola went through in a painstaking way to show 3 A. As I mentioned, no, I didn't do any e-mail or 3 you the three references in chla article to 4 private forwarding, or anything like that. 4 Mr. Epstein'. lawyers. And I'm asking you if 5 Q. In conducting this work, did you rely upon 5 Mr. Epstein's lawyers made any statement about sources that are generally relied upon and considered to 4 Mr. Edwards that would have triggered a hit in your 7 be credible and authoritative within your area of 7 search results? ▪ expertise? • Not that I see, no. Yes. o Can you point to any article that you reviewed la Did you utilize methodologies that aro 10 that contains a statement -- a game by Mr. Epstein'➢ II generally accepted within your area of expertise as II lawyer that would have triggered a hit on your search II accurate moan➢ by which to reach the contusions that 12 request? 13 you've reached? 13 A. Okay. Again, I was just looking for the 14 Yoa. 14 particular statements. I didn't analyze if it was a Is And aro the opinion➢ that you have expressed, 15 quote from a lawyer, but I don't recall any. 14 both in your written report and in your sworn testimony 16 0. And do you recall any quotes from Mr. Epstein 17 today, opinions that you hold to a reasonable degree of I? himself in any of the news articles that you reviewed, 14 scientific certainty within your area of expertise? 10 all 104 that you told Kr. Scarola that you read the is Yoa. 19 entire article, that had a quote from Kr. Epstein that 20 MR. SCAROLA: Thank you. I have no further 20 would have hit your search request? 21 questions. 21 A. Before I answer this, I lust want to clarify. 22 MR. LINK: Just a couple. 22 You said that I -- I said that I either read the entire 23 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 23 article or read is up to the point where I found the 24 BY NE. LINK: 24 statement, but I don't recall a stateroom from 25 Q. Take a look at Exhibit 9 that Mr. Scarola was 25 Mr. Epstein. 82 84 I asking you about, 1 Q. Do you remember seeing a press release by 2 A. Yoa, air. 2 Mr. Epstein related to Kr. Edwards In any way? 3 Q. It's The Shiny Sheet article, October 2Oth, 3 A. A press release free Mr. Epstein? 4 2013. Da you have that in front of you? 4 Q. Yea, sir. • A. Yoa, air. 5 A. I don't recall a press release from 4 Q. Mr. Scarola pointed out a couple of placed • Mr. Epstein. 7 where Mr. Epstein'➢ lawyers wore either quoted or had a 7 KR. LINK: Okay I have no other questions. S statement attributed to themm correct? KR. SCAROTA: And I have no further questions. 9 Correct. 9 KR. LINK: Thank you. 10 Would you point to anywhere in this 10 KR. SCAROTA: Be will read. 11 article whore Mr. Epatein's attorneys said anything 11 THE VIDECCRAPNER: The tine is 11.21. Ile are 12 &bent Mr. Edwards? 12 off the record. This concludes tears deposition. 13 A. Well, let me just look in the article. I 13 (Thereupon, the taking of the deposition was 14 don't see a quote. 14 concluded at 11:21 9.511 IS Q. All right. And Mr. Scarola pointed out three 15 If different statements. Ono by Mr. Brower and two by 16 12 Mr. Haddad. 17 IS And is there anything in what Mr. Brewer or 15 19 Mr. Haddad said to the press that fits ono of the hearth 19 20 parameters you wore looking for? 20 21 From tho➢e atatementa? 21 32 Yes, air, that you were ➢earthing for. 22 33 No. I thought that my question wa➢ -- you 31 24 mean In terms of the article or in terms of the 24 25 statemonta from those lawyers? 25 Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726831 85 87 1 EXCEPT FOR THE CORRECTIONS RADE 1 CERTIFICATE OF OATH HEREIN ON THE ERRATA SHEET BY ME, 2 2 I CERTIFY THIS IS A TRUE AND STATE OF FLORIDA, ACCURATE TRANSCRIPT. FURTHER 2 I SS 3 DEPONENT SATEEN NOT. COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADEI 4 4 5 I, the undersigned authority, certify that 5 DR. BERNARD J. JANSEN 4 DR. BERNARD J. JANSEN personally appeared before se and 6 7 vas duly sworn. STATE OF FLORIDAI 4 WITNESS my hand and official seal this 4th day 7 I SS: COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADEI 9 of Deceaber, 2027. 8 10 9 Sworn and subscribed to before me 11 10 this _ day of 2017. 11 PERSONALLY KNOWN OR I.D. 12 ILIANA LU00 12 Notary Public - State of Florida 39 13 Commission No. 00133630 Notary Public in and for the Conmission Expires: 11/08/2019 24 State of Florida at Large is My Commission Expires: is 15 14 16 I, 17 Is 10 10 9 20 20 II 21 22 22 23 23 24 24 25 25 86 88 , ERRATA SHEET 1 REPORTER'S DEFCGITIIN CERTIFICATE 2 IN RE: Jeffrey Epstein v. Scott Rothstein, et al. 2 Case No. 50-2009C4.040800XXXXIIBAC STATE OF FLORIDAI 3 DEPO OF: DR. BERNARD J. JANSEN 12/1/17 3 I SS 4 DO NOT MITE ON TRANSCRIPT - ENTER ANY CHANCES HERE COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADEI 5 Page-Line 4 Change Reason 4 4 5 1, !Ilene Lugo, Court Reporter, certify that I 7 6 was authorised to and did stenographleally report the 0 7 deposition of DR. BERNARD J. JANSEN; that a review of 9 • the transcript was regaested; and that the transcript is is 9 a true and correct record of ay stenographic notes. I1 12 le 1 further certify that I an not a relative, 13 II ereloyee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties, is 12 parties' attorney, or counsel connected with the action, II 13 nor an I financially interested in the action. 14 14 DATED this 0th day of Decenber, 2017. 17 IS 14 STATE OF FLORIDA, I SS In !LIANA LUGO, Court Reporter 19 COUNTY Of MIAMI-DADE) )7 20 Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I 1$ have read my deposition transcript, and it is true and 19 21 correct subject to any changes in corn or substance 20 entered here. 21 32 22 33 23 Date Signature 36 26 25 25 Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726832 89 l December S, 2017 2 DR. BERNARD J. JANSEN 3 c/o Searcy, Denny, Scarola, Barnhart a Shipley, P.A. a Attn: lack Scarola, Es . I 4 In Re: Jeffrey Epstein v. Scott Rothstein, et al. Case No.: 50-2009CA040800XXXXXBAC 7 Depo of: Dr. Bernard J. Jansen Taken on: December 1, 2017 8 a of pages: 88 Held Until: January 6, 2018 * Dear Dr. Jansen: is This letter is to advise you that the transcript of your deposition taken in the above-referenced Ii cause has been 0001210ted and is awaiting your reading and signing. 12 Please contact our office to make arrangenents co read 13 and sign your deposition transcript. 14 Our information is as follow•: Paint Beach Reporting I, • 7.210010n0 I, If the reading and signing has not boon cortleted 18 prior to January 8, 2018, we shall conclude that you have waived the reading and signing of the is transcript. 20 Your prompt attention to this natter is appreciated. 2L Sincerely, 22 !liana Lugo, Court Reporter 23 cc Scott J. Link, Esq., Esq. 21 Jack Scarola, Lag. 23 Palm Beach Reporting Service, Inc. EFTA02726833