JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Plaintiff,
VS.
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually,
and BRADLEY J. EDWARDS,
individually. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN
AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY,
FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 502009CA0408003OOOCMBAG
JUDGE: CROW
Defendants.
PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S AFFIDAVIT IN
SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER AND
INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW
I, Jeffrey Epstein, having been first duly sworn, depose and state the following:
1. That I am over 18 years old and have personal knowledge of the facts and
circumstances surrounding this case.
2. That on December 21, 2012, Bradley Edwards served me with two separate
discovery requests in the above-referenced case, seeking to discover my financial net
worth.
3. That this financial net worth discovery under these circumstances would violate
my right to financial privacy as guaranteed by the Constitution of the State of Florida.
1
EFTA00298053
4. That this financial net worth discovery is designed to embarrass, harass and
oppress me based upon the following:
a. That Edwards has engaged in and continues to engage in a systematic
course of conduct designed to locate potential plaintiffs who might retain him and/or his
firm in litigation against me;
b. That Edwards continues to actively prosecute a case against the United
States of America in Federal Court with the intention of nullifying an agreement between
the United States of America and myself;
c. That to achieve these goals, Edwards uses highly aggressive tactics
including:
i. Extra-judicial interviews with foreign and domestic press,
including but not limited to The Palm Beach Post, The Buffington Post
The Guardian, The Telegraph, and The Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel;
ii. Inflammatory postings on the Internet including postings on
Edwards's firm's website and Facebook pages;
iii. Using emotionally charged pejoratives when referring to me;
iv. Using my purported relationships with high profile celebrities and
personalities to garner media attention, such as, but not limited to, England's Prince
Andrew, Former President Bill Clinton and Law Professor Alan Dershowitz; and
v. Noticing some of these same high profile celebrities and
personalities for deposition.
5. That I had a good faith basis to file the lawsuit against Scott Rothstein, Bradley
Edwards and L.M.;
2
EFTA00298054
6. That during my deposition on January 25, 2012, Mr. Scarola, on behalf of his
client, used this opportunity to ask irrelevant, harassing, and embarrassing questions over
and above the repeated objections of my counsel.
7. That at said deposition, Mr. Scarola stated that his questions were relevant and
necessary because they were intended to support a RICO claim that he intended to bring
on behalf of Edwards. However, the fact that this claim has not been brought is proof
that the questions asked by Mr. Scarola were merely intended for no other purpose than
to harass, embarrass, and oppress me.
8. That Edwards's actions in other litigation in which he has been the attorney of
record irrefutably proves that even where the Court orders the proper protections from
further widespread dissemination of the produced documents in collateral litigations,
these orders are, in essence, meaningless and do not prevent Edwards from misusing the
documents requested. Specifically, Edwards circumvented the terms of an agreed-to,
negotiated Joint Stipulation in Doe v. Epstein by seeking to disclose confidential
negotiations between my counsel and the U.S. Attorney that I was compelled by the court
to produce where said production was predicated on the protections from public
disclosure through the negotiated Joint Stipulation.
9. That if permitted, such unfettered access to my financial information, business
ventures, and business associates, Edwards will continue his well established pattern of
seeking harassing, oppressive and embarrassing discovery requests and misuse of same;
especially in light of the fact that he is still seeking potential plaintiffs to bring further
lawsuits against me.
10. In an effort to render such discovery unnecessary, I am willing to stipulate to my
3
EFTA00298055
financial net worth being in excess of one hundred million dollars.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYITH NAUGHT.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN
[THIS PORTION INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
EFTA00298056
State of New York )
County of New York )
Before me, the undersigned authority, this day personally appeared Jeffrey
Epstein, who produced as Identification, and who first
being duly sworn, says that all of the matters contained herein are true and correct.
NOTARY PUBLIC,
Sworn and Subscribed before me this January 23, 2013.
5
EFTA00298057
📷 Images in this document (5 detected)
AI-generated factual descriptions of embedded images (llava:13b). These are searchable across the corpus.
[Image 1] The image is a photograph of a document, specifically a page from a legal case. The document appears to be a court filing or a legal brief, as indicated by the formal language and the presence of numbered paragraphs. The text discusses legal matters, including references to a plaintiff, defendant, and a specific case number. There are no visible names, dates, places, or logos that can be confident
[Image 2] The image is a scanned document, specifically a page from a legal or official document. The text is written in English and appears to be a list of statements or points, possibly related to a legal case or a formal report. The document is numbered, indicating it is part of a larger document or series. The text is dense and formal, suggesting it is a professional or legal context. There are no visib
[Image 3] The image shows a document, which appears to be a court order or a legal notice. The document is addressed to a person named "Scott Steven Bowman," and it is from the "Clerk of the Court of the Circuit Court of the 19th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida." The document is dated "January 13, 2021," and it mentions a case number. The text of the document discusses a financial mat
[Image 4] The image shows a document with text, which appears to be a legal or official notice. The document is titled "STATE OF NEW YORK" and includes a section titled "NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING." The text mentions a specific date and location for a public hearing. The document is signed by a person whose name is not visible in the image. The text is printed in black ink on a white background. The document
[Image 5] The image appears to be a document scan, specifically a financial statement or report. It contains text and numerical data, which is typical for such documents. The visible text includes phrases like "Financial Statement," "Financial Statement," and "Financial Statement." There are also numerical figures and percentages, which are likely related to financial data such as income, expenses, and prof