EFTA00799605

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 141 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv 80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page9of51 
g 
1 33, certainly some aspects of the NPA are within Mr. Epstein's 
2 control. There's no question about that. But aspects that 
3 relate to the defense of these cases, either in terms of the 
4 civil lawyers who are defending these, I think there's 12 or 13 
5 pending cases in front of you, there's another Eour cases in 
6 the state court, is the risk is substantial, it's real, and it 
7 presents a chilling effect for the civil lawyers in moving 
8 forward to determine whether or not we're taking some action 
9 that in some way may be a violation of the NPA. 
10 
And the Government's, again, refusal or non-position 
11 with regard to past acts that have been taken in the civil case 
12 with regard to the defense or future acts that we may take with 
13 regard to these contested litigation casts an extraordinary 
14 cloud of doubt and uncertainty and fear that the defense of 
15 these cases could jeopardize Mr. Epstein and put him in the 
16 irreparable position of violating the NPA and then subsequently 
17 being indicted. 
18 
In this particular instance, again, Mr. Epstein has no 
19 intention of willfully violating the NPA, but it's of great 
20 concern to him. And I'd say with the position that the 
21 Government has taken, no notice, no cure period, no opportunity 
Co discuss. Agatir, wechink—ti 
6 'sot wlsairtlreneKTrovtder, 
23 it's not what the deal was between the two contracting parties, 
24 the United States and Mr. Epstein. But that's clearly what 
25 their papers say under the circumstances, and it would create 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001818 
EFTA00799745

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 142 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page100151 10 
1 this irreparable harm to Mr. Epstein under the circumstances. 
2 
In essence, we're left with a catch 22 in defending 
3 the civil cases. We have a mandate to take no action, to take 
4 any action which may be deemed to be a violation of the NPA, 
5 either in the past or in the future, which would in any way 
6 risk Mr. Epstein being indicted by the United States. 
7 
He has the clear risk of an indictment based upon the 
8 papers that the Government filed. It's real, it's not remote, 
9 and it's not speculative. It chills the action of the defense 
10 in this instance of both Mr. Epstein and his attorneys in 
11 trying to defend these cases and decide under the circumstances 
12 can we do this, can we take this position with regard to 
13 depositions, can we take this legal position with regard to 
14 motions to dismiss, with regard to responses, with regard to 
15 replies? 
16 
And we send out paper discovery. Is this in some way 
17 if we contact someone who may be an associate of these 
18 individuals as part of our investigation, is that potentially 
19 in any way a violation of the NPA? Again, we don't think so. 
20 
And, obviously, again, my direction has been from my 
21 client: Don't take any action that would result in me being 
-i-ndi-cted under—the-NPA. Well, 
14 
. 
But., general , 
23 civil lawyers or civil lawyers in defending a personal injury 
24 case or a tort case, which is exactly what these are, and from 
25 a practical standpoint, we use various tools to do discovery. 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001819 
EFTA00799746

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 143 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 11 of 51 11 
1 They're standard. They're specific. They're very temporary. 
2 Very typical. 
3 
But in this instance, as the Court knows, things are 
4 not typical with regard to this case in any way, shape or form. 
5 We can't even serve subpoenaes, there's objections and there's 
6 -- we can't even serve objections to third parties so we can 
7 obtain documents unless we have to filter it through the 
8 plaintiffs' attorneys. They won't allow us to use their 
9 clients' names, even in a subpoena that would never be filed in 
10 the court. 
11 
How do we do a deposition of a third party? We wanted 
12 to take the deposition of Jane Doe 4. Well, who is she? Well, 
13 we can't tell you that. Well, who's the defendant? Well, we 
14 can't tell you that because nobody wants anybody to know 
15 anything about the case. They want to present it strictly 
16 through rose-colored glasses. 
17 
And in this particular instance, we simply can't 
18 defend this case or take certain action with the Spector 
19 hanging over us that, in fact, the Government may deem it to be 
20 a violation of the NPA, because very clearly in their response 
21 papers, they don't say. They say we don't take the position, 
 
22 and—then  
y - take 
substantial position to we thtnk 
h 
23 not all that substantial factors that would entitle him to a 
24 stay. 
25 
Except for the one major issue which the Court posed 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001820 
EFTA00799747

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 144 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 12 of 51 12 
1 in the question is, is can he defend these cases? That's what 
2 I really want to know. Can he defend these cases and, in 
3 essence, what he has done in the past or what his defense team 
4 has done in the past and what they're going to do in the 
5 future, can you give him, Epstein, assurances that the 
6 Government under this situation, whatever he does, based on 
7 advice of counsel, that that cannot be a willful violation of 
8 the NPA, which they can -- they, the U.B. -- can then turn 
9 around and say that's a violation of the agreement and, 
10 therefore, we're going to go proceed to indict you under the 
11 circumstances. 
12 
Our position is, Your Honor, is that the U.S. has now 
13 cavalierly suggested that, as they did in picking up on the 
14 court's docket entry or prior order, is, look, compliance with 
15 the NPA is solely up to Mr. Epstein. In this type of balance 
16 of equities, it doesn't speak in favor of a stay. 
17 
Well, that's great. And maybe that was the position 
18 back in '08, on August 5th of '08, when the issue came up in 
19 front of the Court with regard to the initial stay. 
20 
But the Government's papers under these circumstances 
21 suggested a very different set of circumstances. Their own 
 
2 
-ate 
, 
h'-iis- th 
-we—argued—in—t1 a n,ut7:on for` 
23 stay, is that the Government's position is that we can 
24 unilaterally indict this man if we think he's breached the NPA. 
25 
we don't think that's right, but we have no buffer 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001821 
EFTA00799748

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 145 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 13 of 51 13 
1 between us and the Government. They'll say, and as the Court 
2 knows, the Government has substantial power. The Government 
3 does what it wants. Most of the time hopefully they're right. 
4 Sometimes they make mistakes. 
5 
But in this particular instance, my client has rights. 
6 We think that there's notice provisions, we think there's cure 
7 provisions under the NPA. That's not what their paper says 
8 under the circumstances. 
9 
And what we'd like to know from the Government, and 
10 maybe the answer is basically what the Court asks is, let the 
11 Government come forward today and say, based on the knowledge 
12 that we have, or as of today's date, June 12th, 2009, we, the 
13 Government, agree that there is no set of circumstances, not 
14 that we're not aware of, but as of today's date, there is 
15 nothing that exists that would be a violation of the NPA. 
16 
THE COURT: Well, that's way beyond what I'm 
17 interested in. I don't know what Mr. Epstein may have done 
18 outside the context of defending this case that may constitute 
19 a violation. And if he has done something outside the context 
20 of defending this case that's a violation, I don't care. 
21 That's between the United States and Mr. Epstein. 
only canoe 
out—whettrera ty 
t y Ice does 
23 defending these civil actions is going to be a violation of the 
24 non-prosecution agreement. If he has done something else, it's 
25 none of my business, and I don't care, and I'm not going to 
TOTALAccEsscourRocsiNEnvoaKREAcnmETRANsumrnoN 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001822 
EFTA00799749

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 146 
of 176 
Case9:08-cv-80119.-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 14of51 14
1 even ask the Government to give you an assurance that he hasn't 
2 done anything that might have violated the agreement up till 
3 today. I'm only interested in defending these civil actions. 
4 
MR. CRITTON: Then I would respectfully submit to the 
5 Court that the Government be asked in that limited context, are 
6 they as of today, whether there were or not, but as of today is 
7 there anything that has been done or will you take the 
8 position, the United States, that any position that Mr. Epstein 
9 has taken with regard to defending these civil cases is in any 
10 way a violation of the NPA? 
11 
THE COURT: Well, I'm not sure what they're going to 
12 say, but that might -- that cures the problem up to this point. 
13 But then we have to deal with what's going to happen from here 
14 on in. And that's another issue that we have to deal with. 
15 
So I understand your position. 
16 
But has anyone suggested to you on behalf of the 
17 United States that there is something that you've done in 
18 defending this case that they believe may or could be construed 
19 as a violation of the non-prosecution agreement? Has anyone 
20 pointed to anything that you've done? For example, the fact 
21 that you've wanted to take their -- I don't know if you've 
uLS(.eU UepusILiUlla VI 11VL 111 
-case;-but 
you've—sent-
23 notice of taking deposition, if you sent requests for 
24 production of documents, if you sent interrogatories, if you 
25 issued third party subpoenas? Is anything you've done thus far 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001823 
EFTA00799750

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 147 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 16of51 15 
1 in the context of this case been brought to your attention as a 
2 potential violation? 
3 
MR. CRITTON: I have received no notification nor am I 
4 aware that we've received any notification of any action that 
5 we have taken today. As I suggested to the Court, I don't know 
6 when they've done or not. And in their papers they suggested, 
7 well, we don't know everything that's gone on in the civil 
8 litigation. 
9 
But from a practical standpoint, it was a number of 
10 comments that were made in their papers is, we can indict, we 
11 can see if there's a breach. 
12 
Judge, I may have some --
13 
THE COURT: Before you go on. 
14 
MR. CRITTON: I'm sorry. 
15 
THE COURT: You've focused a great deal on the 
16 Government's response to my inquiry as supporting your position 
17 that you're in jeopardy. But you've made the suggestion, even 
18 before this brief was filed, that defending the case was going 
19 to potentially result in an assertion or allegation that you 
20 breached the non-prosecution agreement. 
21 
So what was it that caused you to make that initial 
221 aws 
u 
—Bee 
s- what 
9 
y art-entianT-wa-s-not 
23 this brief that the Government has filed was in response to 
24 something that you filed initially in your most recent motion 
25 for a stay which raised the issue. 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001824 
EFTA00799751

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 148 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 160151 16 
1 
So what was it that gave you some concern to even 
2 raise the issue that defending this case is going to constitute 
3 a breach? 
4 
MR. CRITTON: Because there are other instances where 
5 counsel other than myself, not in the civil aspects, where 
6 allegations have been made and letters have been sent by the 
7 United States suggesting that there's been a violation of the 
8 NPA. And under those circumstances, some notification was 
9 provided. 
10 
THE COURT: Did it have anything to do with defending 
11 the civil actions? 
12 
MR. CRITTON: It did not. 
13 
THE COURT: So then why was that issue raised by you 
14 in the first instance? 
15 
MR. CRITTON: Because of the prospect that the 
16 defendant could take, that the U.S. would take the position 
17 under the circumstances that a position that we took with 
18 regard to the contested litigation may well impact, that the 
19 Government may have a very different view of what the 
20 interpretation of the agreement is. 
21 
And as an example is a number of the parties, and I 
z2-
 
-du 
9 
u--a- -dtacusEriarc-the
raue 
23 is, is under 2255 is that from the defendant's perspective the 
24 deal that was cut on that, it was a very specific deal. It 
25 dealt with both consensual and contested litigation. It dealt 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001825 
EFTA00799752

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 149 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 17of51 17 
1 with a secret list of individuals who we had no idea who was on 
2 the list, and a commitment that he would under certain 
3 circumstances be required to pay a minimum amount of damages, 
4 which our position is under 2255 based upon the statute that 
5 was in effect at the time, a $50,000 as to anyone who wanted --
6 who came forward who was on the list and met certain criteria. 
7 
The position that now has been asserted by a number of 
8 the plaintiffs under the circumstances, and it's been pled, and 
9 actually a number of the complainants is, is Epstein agreed, 
10 and they cite to a letter that was sent by Ms. Villafana from 
11 the Government, that says he has to plead guilty or he can't 
12 contest liability. That may be true under very, very limited 
13 or specific circumstances. 
14 
But what the plaintiffs have done in a number of the 
15 cases, and these are pending motions, is they've said is, well, 
16 we think C.M.A. cases is a good example, they've pled 30 
17 separate counts of 2255 alleged violations. And they're saying 
18 under the circumstances is, therefore, we have 2255 violations, 
19 there's 30 of them, so 30 times 150, or should be, or whether 
20 it's 150, that's the amount of money that we want, so maybe $15 
21 million, or whatever the number is. 
Some- 
tawyers—have beect even 
23 more creative. They've said is, well, we'll agree that it's 
24 only one cause of action but that each number of violations; 
25 that is, if 20 alleged incidents occurred, that we would 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-C V-MARRA 
001826 
EFTA00799753

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 150 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 18of51 18 
1 consider to be, or that we will argue are violations, then we 
2 can take 20 times the 50, or the 150, depending on which 
3 statute is applicable. 
4 
So the Government under that set of circumstance could 
5 say, and, again, this is one of the reasons that we raised it, 
6 they could say, look, our deal with you was that you couldn't 
7 contest liability, that you were waiving liability, or your 
8 ability to contest an enumerated offense under 2255. 
9 
Again, part of the deal was as to an enumerated 
10 offense. Okay. Well, what's that mean? What did he plead to? 
11 Well, he really didn't plead to anything, which is another 
12 issue associated with the 2255. But if the Government comes in 
13 and says, no, wait a minute, our position was, is that you're 
14 stuck with 2255 and the language within the NPA. And, 
15 therefore, whether it's an offense or whether it's multiple 
16 offenses or violations or each one represents an individual 
17 cause of action, if the Government takes the position that's 
18 adverse to what we think the clear reading of the agreement was 
19 under those circumstances, they could claim a violation. 
20 
And as a result -- and that's one of the reasons we 
21 put -- that was the most glaring one to us, so we raised that 
sue-. -And—th 
c 
c thw 
pu sn-ame —with 
23 regard to, is we can just proceed to indict if we think that 
24 there's been a breach of the agreement. 
25 
That puts us at substantial risk and chills our 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
088073642V-NtARRA 
001827 
EFTA00799754

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 151 
of 176 
Case9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 19of51 19 
1 ability to move forward. Thank you, Your Honor. 
2 
THE COURT: Thank you. Who wants to be heard from the 
3 plaintiffs first? 
4 
Is there any plaintiff's attorney who is contending 
5 that the defense of these civil actions by Mr. Epstein is going 
6 to constitute a breach of the non-prosecution agreement? 
7 
MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, this is Bob Josefsberg. 
8 May I speak? 
9 
THE COURT: Yes, sir. 
10 
MR. JOSEFSBERG: We're not quite confident that any 
11 breaches of any agreement, which were third-party 
12 beneficiaries, should be resolved by you. We're not saying it 
13 shouldn't. But we have not raised any breach of agreement. We 
14I think that is between the United States and Mr. Epstein. 
15 
What I find incredulous and disingenuous is that 
16i Mr. Epstein is saying that he wants a stay because he may be 
17 forced into taking actions in the defense of this case that 
18 would violate the agreement. 
19 
And let me make our position clear on that. If he 
20 wants to move to take depositions, interrogatories, production, 
21 and they are according to your rulings appropriate, not 
-invasive- crf--the- p-rivacy-crf- someone-, -and-they-are- tel 
23 I don't know how those could in any way be violations of the 
24 agreement. 
25 
What I find hypocritical is that there are two parts 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001828 
EFTA00799755

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 152 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page20of51 20 
1 to the agreement that I am a beneficiary of. One of them is 
2 that he has agreed that on any action brought in the 2255, he 
3 will admit to liability. 
4 
And I received on May 26 a motion to dismiss, which 
5 we're prepared to respond to and disagree with, but totally 
6 contesting liability, saying that the statute doesn't apply 
7 because the girls are no longer minors and saying, and this is 
8 the great one, saying that the predicate of the conviction 
9 under 2255 has not been satisfied. 
10 
Now, the understanding that I have is the agreement 
11 between the Government and Mr. Epstein was that the Government 
12 desired to see these victims made whole, and wanted them to be 
13 in the same position as if Mr. Epstein had been prosecuted and 
14 pled or convicted. And they would be able to have the 
15 predicate of that criminal conviction, which just as a matter 
16 of liability would just be introduced as proof that he's done 
17 this. 
18 
They, under the agreement, are supposed to admit to 
19 liability on limited something that's under 2255. He has 
20 filed, but since there is no conviction, there can be no civil 
21 suit under 2255, with which we disagree. But it is totally in 
23 
The second part is there are many young ladies, and 
24 this perhaps he can use this to his great advantage, who are 
25 humiliated about this entire situation. Some of them won't 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001829 
EFTA00799756

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 153 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page210f51 21 
1 come forward. 
2 
We were appointed by Judge 
as a Special Master 
3 to represent these young ladies. And some of them don't even 
4 want to file suit. They don't even want to be known as Jane 
5 Doe 103. They don't want any of the risks for these motions 
6 that are pending. 
7 
And part of the agreement was that if we represented 
8 them and they settle, Mr. Epstein would pay our fees. And he 
9 has written us as of yesterday that he is under no obligation 
10 to pay our fees on settling cases. 
11 
Now, those two matters, I believe, may be breaches. 
12 But I am not asking this Court at this time to do anything 
13 about them. Nor am I telling the Government, I'm not running 
14 to the Government and saying indict him because I want you to 
15 pressure him to do what he agreed to. 
16 
I'm a third-party beneficiary for that agreement, and 
17 I may move to enforce certain parts of it. But as far as the 
18 issue of staying the litigation, that is the exact opposite of 
19 the intent and the letter of the NPA. The purpose of the NPA 
20 was so that these 34 young ladies, these victims who have been 
21 severely traumatized, may move on with their lives. 
An -to tad}, this ac,tiuu wu d 'be-the- Exact oppusile 
23 the purpose of that agreement and would be horrible 
24 psychologically for all of my clients. 
25 
THE COURT: Mr. Josefsberg, I understand your 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001830 
EFTA00799757

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 154 
of 176 
Case9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page22of51 22 
1 position. And I don't want to argue the merits of whether a 
2 stay should or should not be granted. 
3 
I'm just trying to understand what the ground rules 
4 are going to be if I grant a stay or if I deny a stay. And 
5 I've already denied a stay once. I have to decide this current 
6 motion, and I just want to know what is going to happen if I 
7 deny the stay in terms of Mr. Epstein's exposure under the 
8 non-prosecution agreement. That's my concern. 
9 
So if you're telling me that you're not going to urge 
10 the United States, on behalf of any of your clients, to take 
11 the position that he's breached the agreement because he's 
12 taking depositions, because he's pursuing discovery, because 
13 he's conducting investigations that anyone in any other type of 
14 civil litigation might conduct with respect to plaintiffs that 
15 are pursuing claims against a defendant, that those typical 
16 types of actions, in your judgment, are not breaches of the 
17 agreement and that he can go forward and defend the case as any 
18 other defendant could defend, and you're not going to run to 
19 the United States and say, hey, he's breaching the agreement by 
20 taking depositions and he's breaching the agreement by issuing 
21 subpoenas to third parties in order to gather information 
 
essary Lu defend, then 
p u tem7--But 
23 going to be accused of breaching the agreement because he sends 
24 out a notice of deposition of one of your clients, how is he 
25 supposed to defend the case? 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001831 
EFTA00799758

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 155 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 23 of 51 23 
1 
MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, you're totally correct. 
2 He can depose my client. That's not a problem. But the 
3 problem is that these are not typical clients and this is not a 
4 typical case. He has written in his pleadings that he wants to 
5 publish the names of these girls in the newspapers so that 
6 other people may come forward to discuss their sexual 
7 activities with these different plaintiffs. That's not your 
8 typical case. But are rulings that you'll make in this case, 
9 and they're not part of the NPA. 
10 
As far as my going to the Government is concerned, I 
11 find it very uncomfortable for me to use the Government to try 
12 to pursue my financial interest in litigation. And I know that 
13 Mr. Epstein and his counsel will make much ado about it. So I 
14 am not going to be running there. 
15 
However, if they start taking depositions regarding 
16 liability, I will consider that to be a breach because they're 
17 supposed to have admitted liability. 
18 
THE COURT: But, again, I don't have the agreement and 
19 I don't remember reading the agreement. But what I'm being 
20 told is the part of the agreement that admits liability is only 
21 as to a 2255 claim, and there are numerous other personal 
tnjury Lull claims other Ida 2455 -claim.  
And there's a limit of damages on the 2255 claim, as I 
23 
24 understand it, but I presume that all the plaintiffs are going 
25 to seek more than the limited or capped amount of damages in 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001832 
EFTA00799759

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 156 
of 176 
Case9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 24 of 51 Y4 
1 the non-prosecution agreement as to the other claims. 
2 
And so why aren't they entitled to defend and limit 
3 the amount of damages that your client is seeking on the 
4 non-2255 tort claims? 
5 
MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, you are correct. On 
6 non-2255 tort claims, they are permitted to do the defense, 
7 whatever is appropriate. 
8 
My cases are pure 2255 on which liability under the 
9 agreement is supposed to be admitted. Now, as to the amount of 
10 damages, there are legal issues that will be before you and 
11 under the C.M.A. cases that are getting before you, as to 
12 whether it is 50 or 150. That has nothing to do with the NPA. 
13 
There are legal issues that are before you as to 
14 whether it is per statute, per count. or per incident or per 
15 plaintiff. Those have nothing to do with the NPA. There is no 
16 amount in NPA. Those will be resolved. 
17 
Anyone who has brought a case that is outside of 2255, 
18 the defense is permitted to contest liability under the NPA. 
19 That's no violation. 
20 
Under the NPA if someone brought a case under just 
21 2255, Mr. Epstein, if he is to keep his word, cannot contest 
 
 —2 
tic AndLtttLe would—no—need to s ay L1iiu. 
ecause- it-
23 is a self-fulfilling agreement. He can contest liability. And 
24 as far as the amount of damages, anyone that wants to go over 
25 the statutory minimums, of course, he can contest that in any 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001833 
EFTA00799760

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 157 
of 176 
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page25of51 2 
1 way that is proper under the Rules of Evidence and your 
2 rulings. The NPA has no limitation on his contesting damages 
3 above the minimum statutory amount. 
4 
The only thing that he has done is in his actions of 
5 refusing to pay for settling defendants, and in his saying that 
6 he has no liability under 2255, those appear to be contrary to 
7 what's in the NPA. 
8 
But I'm not in any position right now to claim a 
9 1. breach, and I don't know whether I'd be claiming a breach or 
10 enforcing it in front of you, suing him for fees, asking you to 
11 have him admit liability, or complaining to the Government. 
12 And that's why I'm not that helpful in this situation because I 
13 think it's the Government's role. 
14 
But I do not waive the right to be a third-party 
15 beneficiary because pursuant to my appointment, which was 
16 agreed to by Mr. Epstein, I and my clients have certain rights, 
17 and we want to enforce them. 
18 
But his defending this lawsuit will not in any way be 
19 a violation. His getting this lawsuit stayed would be a 
20 violation of the spirit of taking care of these girls, and 
21 there would be other issues. Like if there is a stay, Your 
-1115- be pObLiug a bunch
23 
THE COURT: We don't need to talk about those issues. 
24 That's not my concern. 
25 
MR. JOSEFSBERG: I agree, Your Honor, we don't. 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001834 
EFTA00799761

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 158 
of 176 
Case9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page26of51 26 
1 
THE COURT: That's not my concern. So, again, I just 
2 want to make sure that if the cases go forward and if 
3 Mr. Epstein defends the case as someone ordinarily would defend 
4 a case that's being prosecuted against him or her, that that in 
5 and of itself is not going to cause him to be subject to 
6 criminal prosecution. 
7 
MR. JOSEFSBERG: I agree, Your Honor. 
8 
THE COURT: Any other plaintiff's counsel want to 
9 chime in? 
10 
MR. WILLITS: Richard Willits on behalf of C.M.A.. I 
11 would join, to weigh in on what Mr. Josefsberg said. 
12 
MR. JOSEFSBERG: Your Honor, I could not hear. 
13 
THE COURT: We'll get him to a microphone. 
14 Mr. Willits is speaking. 
15 
MR. WILLITS: On behalf of my client, C.M.A., we join 
16 in what Mr. Josefsberg said, and we also want to point out 
17i something to the Court. 
18 
First, we want to make a representation to the Court, 
19 we have no intention of complaining to the U.S. Attorney's 
20 Office, never had that intention, don't have that intention in 
21 the future, but, of course, subject to what occurs in the 
23 
I want to point out to the Court that Mr. Epstein went 
24 into this situation with his eyes wide open, represented by 
25 counsel, knowing that civil suits had to be coming. If he 
TOTAL ACCESS COURTROOM NETWORK REALTIME TRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001835 
EFTA00799762

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 159 
of 176 
Case9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page 27 of 51 27 
1 didn't know it, his lawyers knew it. 
2 
He appears to be having second thoughts now about he 
3 could have negotiated this way or he could have negotiated that 
4 way with the U.S. Attorney's Office. And they want to impose 
5 their second thoughts on the innocent plaintiffs. We don't 
6 think that's fair. We think it's in the nature of invited 
7 error, if there was any error whatsoever. 
8 
Thank you. 
9 
THE COURT: You agree he should be able to take the 
10 ordinary steps that a defendant in a civil action can take and 
11 not be concerned about having to be prosecuted? 
12 
MR. WILLITS: Of course. And we say the same thing 
13 Mr. Josefsberg said. It's all subject to your rulings and the 
14 direction of this Court as to what is proper and what is not 
15 proper. And we're prepared to abide by the rulings of this 
16 Court, and we have no intention of running to the State's 
17 Attorney. 
18 
THE COURT: The U.S. Attorney? 
19 
MR. WILLITS: I'm sorry. The U.S. Attorney. 
20 
THE COURT: Mr. Garcia. 
21 
MR. GARCIA: Thank you, Your Honor. 
 
efly, I L1,an1. pt. 
ps-defenercounsel 
23 forgot about this, but on pages 17 and 19 of my memorandum of 
24 law in opposition to the motion to dismiss, I did make 
25 reference to the non-prosecution agreement, and I did say that 
TOTALACCESSCOURTROOMNETWORKREALTIMETRANSCRIPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001836 
EFTA00799763

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 160 
of 176 
Case9:08-cv-80119-KAM 
Document 180 
Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2009 
Page28of51 28 
1 the contesting of the jurisdiction of this Court was a 
2 potential breach of the non-prosecution agreement. 
3 
So my client happens to have, and they have filed with 
4 the Court a copy of her state court complaint, given the fact 
5 that the non-prosecution agreement limits the non-contesting of 
6 jurisdiction to claims exclusively brought under the federal 
7 statute. 
8 
I'm going to go ahead and withdraw those contentions 
9 on pages 17 and 19 of my memo of law because it doesn't apply 
10i to my case. So to the extent that I raised this issue with 
11 defense counsel and the Court, I'm going to withdraw that 
12 aspect of it. 
13 
THE COURT: Can you file something in writing on that 
14 point with the Court? 
15 
MR. GARCIA: Yes. 
16 
THE COURT: What do you say about this issue that 
17 we're here on today? 
18 
MR. GARCIA: I think that the problem that I have with 
19 it is that this non-prosecution agreement is being used by 
20 defense counsel for the exact opposite purpose that it was 
21 intended. My perception of this thing, and I wasn't around, is 
essentially
•grEilf 
bought his wartnlr of a criminal 
23 prosecution, which is wonderful for the victims in a way, and 
24 wonderful for him, too. 
25 
Now he's trying to use the non-prosecution agreement 
TOTALACCESSCOURTROOMNETWORKREMJIMEIRANSGUPTION 
08-80736-CV-MARRA 
001837 
EFTA00799764