Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 1 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 12

# UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

JANE DOE NO. 2,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 3,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 4,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 5,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346

www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 2 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 12

Defendant.
/

JANE DOE NO. 6,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 7,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
C.M.A.,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.

JANE DOE,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON

Plaintiff,

vs.

2

Podhurst  Orseck,P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami,FL33130,Miami305,358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 3 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 3 of 12

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
/
JANE DOE NO. II,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 101,
CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 102,
CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,

Defendant.

3

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25West Flagler Street, Suite 800,Miami,FL33130, Miami 305358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 4 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 4 of 12

PLAINTIFFS JANE DOE NO. 101 and JANE DOE NO. 102'S

# MOTION FOR NO-CONTACT ORDER

Plaintiffs, Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 (together, the "Plaintiffs") hereby

move this Court for a No-Contact Order directed to Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and, as grounds, state as follows:

1. After investigations by the Palm Beach Police Department, the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "USAO"), Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, in June 2008, entered pleas of "guilty" in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach Count, Florida, to various Florida state crimes involving the solicitation of minors for prostitution and the procurement of minors for the purposes of prostitution.

2. During the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30, 2008, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillo ordered Defendant "not to have any contact, direct or indirect" with any victims. (Transcript of the Plea Conference at 20, relevant pages attached hereto as Exhibit A). Judge Dale Pucillo went on to clarify that, by "indirect,” she meant that Defendant should not send any text messages, e-mails, Facebook contact, My Space contact, telephone calls, voicemails, or messages through third parties to "any of these victims." Id. Judge Dale Pucillo expressly stated that the no-contact order should apply to "all of the victims." Id.

3. In addition, after Defendant entered into a non-prosecution agreement with the USAO, Assistant United States Attorney Marie Villafaña provided Defendant's attorneys with a list of individuals whom the USAO had identified as victims of child sex exploitation as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2255 (the "USAO List"). The USAO was prepared to indict Defendant based upon Defendant's sexual exploitation of these minor victims. It was the intent of the USAO to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Defendant been

4

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346

www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD

Document 16-2

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010

Page 5 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 5 of 12

convicted at trial. Thus, upon information and belief, AUSA Marie Villafana and Mr. Michael

Tein, former counsel for Defendant, along with Mr. Jack Goldberger, who still represents Defendant, entered into a verbal agreement at the time AUSA Villafana provided the USAO List to them, whereby neither Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, nor his agents would have any direct or indirect contact with the victims named on the USAO List.

4. Nevertheless, during a March 25 th meeting with Defendant's counsel, Defendant's

counsel told Plaintiffs' counsel that it is Defendant's position that the no-contact order agreed to during the state plea conference does not apply to anyone other than those three victims who were officially part of Defendant's state plea.

5. Upon Plaintiffs' counsel seeking reassurance from Defendant's counsel that

neither Defendant nor his agents would contact victims on the USAO List, Defendant's counsel responded that Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, would not contact any ofundersigned counsel's clients as long as Mr. Josefsberg was representing them in connection with settlement discussions.

6. As a result, on April 17, 2009, Plaintiffs' counsel sent defense counsel a letter

requesting that Defendant provide written confirmation that neither he nor his agents will directly or indirectly contact any ofthe victims represented by Plaintiffs' counsel (the "No Contact Letter") (April 17, 2009 Letter attached hereto as Exhibit B). On May 18, 2009, Plaintiffs' counsel again requested this written confirmation (E-mail correspondence attached hereto as Exhibit C). Despite Plaintiffs' reasonable requests, Defendant's counsel first responded by stating that the Non-Prosecution Agreement does not prevent some form of contact with undersigned counsel's clients. (Redacted May 18, 2009 Letter from Mr. Robert Critton is attached hereto as Exhibit D). Defendant's counsel then sent a letter on May 21, 2009 citing the Commentto Rule 4-4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct that states that "[p ]arties to a matter

5

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305,358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346

www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 6 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 6 of 12

may communicate directly with each other." (Redacted May 21, 2009 Letter from Mr. Critton is attached hereto as Exhibit E). Thus, despite Mr. Critton's statement that it is not Defendant's intention to have direct contact with undersigned counsel's clients, Defendant obviously believes he can change his intentions if he so chooses.

7. Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, is a designated sexual offender who sexually abused

Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102 when the victims were minors. As a result of his abuse, Plaintiffs have in the past suffered, now suffer, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self- esteem, loss of dignity, and invasion of their privacy. Any further direct or indirect contact with Defendant and/or his agents would cause a great deal of additional damages. Moreover, any desire or need on the part of Defendantto contact these victims-implied by virtue of his refusal to tmambiguously confirm that he will not contact them-isdisturbing and suspect, at best. At a minimum, Defendant's refusal to avoid contaet works as a ploy to attempt to keep Plaintiffs in "victim mode."

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to enter an order prohibiting

Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and any of his agents from any direct or indirect contact with Plaintiffs, except through Plaintiffs' attorney ofrecord through the duration of this Court's order.

## Memorandum In Support

As previously stated, during the course of Defendant's state plea conference of June 30, 2008, Palm Beach Circuit Court Judge Deborah Dale Pucillo ordered Defendant "not to have any contact, direct or indirect" with any of Defendant's victims. However, for what could only be dubious purposes, Defendant seeks to take advantage of the fact that only three of Defendant's numerous victims were officially a part of the State of Florida's criminal prosecution of

6

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130,Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 7 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Pa

Defendant and that he entered into a non-prosecution agreement with the USAO. Thus, despit the no-contact order being considered a standard condition of probation or community contro for sex offenders such as Defendant, and despite his counsel having agreed to a no-contact orde with AUSA Villafaña for all of Defendant's victims on the USAO List, Defendant is now takin the position that neither Judge Dale Pucillo's no-contact order nor his agreement with the USA( via his counsel restricts him from contacting any of the victims except for the three victim directly involved in the state plea. Because of the non-prosecution agreement, there is no federa conviction against Defendant with respect to Plaintiffs and other victims on the USAO List who are similarly situated and, thus, no accompanying sentencing court to issue a no-contact order However, each of the victims on the USAO List is supposed to be in the same position as i Defendant had been convicted in federal court. In crimes involving victims, at the time of sentencing, a sentencing judge generally has wide discretion to order that the defendant have no contact with the victim or victims of the crime or crimes for which the defendant is being sentenced. Where the defendant is given a sentence of probation or community control, the no- contact order can be made a condition of the defendant's supervision. The case for judicial intervention is heightened in cases such as this one, where Defendant has sexually exploited numerous minors. Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102, like all of the other young women on the USAO List, were sexually abused by Defendant; any further direct contact with Defendant and/or his agents would cause a great deal of additional damages. Previous contact by Defendant and his agents with other victims has had a terrible effect on the young women's ability to heal the scars of Defendant's abuse. Additionally, Defendant's contacting his victims also has the predictable effect of undermining the victims' willingness to proceed with their civil actions against Defendant. Defendant's demonstrated use of his wealth, power, and influence has the immediate effect of intimidating young women who have already been traumatized by

7

Podhurst Orseck, P.A. Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305 358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 Fort Lauderdale 954.463 4346 + 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305 358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 Fort Lauderdale 954.463 4346 +

www.podht

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 8 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 8 of 12

his sexual exploitation. Indeed, any desire or need on the part ofDefendant to contact his

victims, implied by virtue ofhis refusal to confirm that he will not contact them directly or indirectly, is disturbing and suspect, at best. Plaintiffs thus ask this Court to provide the protection and peace of mind that each of them needs.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully move this Court to enter an order granting

Plaintiffs' Motion for No-Contact Order prohibiting Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, from any contactor communication with Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102, either directly or indirectly, except through Plaintiffs' attorney ofrecord for the duration of the order.

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1.A.3

On May 18, 2009, undersigned counsel conferred with counsel for Defendant in a good

faith effort to resolve the issues rnised in this motion, and Defendant's counsel advised that Defendant opposes this motion.

Date: May 22, 2009

/s/Robert C. Josefsberg

Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856
Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
City National Bank Building
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, Florida 33130
(305) 358-2800
(305) 358-2382 (fax)
rjosefsberg@podhurst.com
kezell@podhurst.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102

## Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that, on May 22, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List in the manner specified, either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other

8

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800,Miami,FL33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 9 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 9 of 12

authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically

Notices  of  Electronic Filing.

/s/ Robert Josefsberg
Robert C. Josefsberg, Bar No. 040856
Katherine W. Ezell, Bar No. 114771
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
City National Bank Building
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, Florida 33130
(305) 358-2800
(305) 358-2382 (fax)
rjosefsberg@podhurst.com
kezell@podhurst.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and Jane Doe No. 102

9

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346

www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 10 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 10 of 12

# SERVICE LIST
JANE DOE NO.  2  v.  JEFFREY EPSTEIN
Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON
United States District Court, Southern District of  Florida

Robert Critton, Esq.

MichaelJ. Pike, Esq.
Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP
515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone: (561) 842-2820
Fax: (561) 515-3148
rcrit@~bclclaw.com 
mpike@bclclaw.com 
Counsel for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein

Jack Goldberger, Esq.

Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 
250 Australian Avenue South, Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401 
Phone: (561) 659-8300
Fax: (561) 835-8691
jagesq@bellsouth.net 
Co-Counsel  for  Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein

Bruce E. Reinhart, Esq.
Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A.
250 South Australian Avenue, Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone: (561) 202-6360
Fax: (561) 828-0983
ecf@brucereinhartlaw.com
Counsel for Co-Defendant, Sarah Kellen

Jack Scarola, Esq.
Jack P. Hill, Esq.
Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A.
2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard
West Palm Beach, Florida 33409
Phone: (561) 686-6300
Fax: (561) 383-9456
jsx@searcylaw.com
iph@searcylaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A.

10

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

十

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346

www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 11 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 11 of 12

Adam Horowitz, Esq.

Stuart Mermelstein, Esq.
Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A.
18205 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2218
Miami, FL 3 3160
Phone: (305) 931-2200
Fax: (305) 931-0877
ahorowi tz@sexabuseattorney.com
smermelstein(msexabuseattomey .com
Counsel  for  Plaintiffs in Related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,08-80232, 08-80380, 08-
80381, 08-80993, 08-80994

Spencer Todd Kuvin, Esq.
Theodore Jon Leopold, Esq.
Leopold Kuvin, P.A.
2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
Phone: (561) 515-1400
Fax: (561) 515-1401
skuvin@leopoldkuvin.com
tleopold@leopoldkuvin.com
Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-08804

Richard Willits, Esq.
Richard H. Willits, P.A.
2290 10th Ave North, Suite 404
Lake Worth, FL 33461
Phone: (561) 582-7600
Fax: (561) 588-8819
lawyerwillits@aol.com
reelrhw@hotmail.com
Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80811

Brad Edwards, Esq.
Law Office of Brad Edwards & Associates, LLC
2028 Harrison Street, Suite 202
Hollywood, FL 33020
Phone: (954) 414-8033
Fax: (954) 924-1530
bedwards@rra-law.com
be@bradedwardslaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80893

11

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346

www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 12 of 31

Case 9: 08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 12 of 12

Isidro Manuel Garcia, Esq.

Garcia Elkins & Boehringer
224 Datura Avenue, Suite 900
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone: (561) 832-8033
Fax: (561) 832-7137
isid.rogarcia(a),beUsouth.net 
Counsel  for  Plaintiff in Related Case No. 08-80469

12

Podhurst Orseck, P.A.

25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346

www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 13 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 4

# EXHIBIT A

to

Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's

# Motion for No-Contact Order

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD

Document 16-2

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010

Page 14 of 31

,Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-2

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 2 of 4

1

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CRIMINAL DIVISION

STATE OF FLORIDA )
)
vs ) CASE NO. 06 CF9454AMB
)     08 9381CFAMB
JEFFREY EPSTEIN )
)
Defendant.
)

PHYLLIS A. DAMES, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

PLEA CONFERENCE

PRESIDING:  HONORABLE  DEBORAH  DALE  PUCILLO

APPEARANCES:

ON BEHALF OF THE STATE:
BARRY E. KRISCHER, ESQUIRE
State Attorney
401 North Dixie Highway
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
By: LANNA BELOHLAVEK, ESQUIRE
Assistant State Attorney

ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT:
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
By: JACK GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE

CERTIFIED COPY

June 30, 2008
Palm Beach County Courthouse
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
Beginning at 8:40 o'clock, a.m.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

2222222

23

24

25

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 15 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 3 of 4

20

1

2

3

4

5 10

60

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

23

22225

24

regularly congregate?

MS. BELOHLAVEK: I personally do not

know.

THE COURT: Neither do I, which is

why I'm asking. Has that been

investigated?

MR. GOLDBERGER: We have done our due

diligence, for what it's worth, there is a residential street. There are not children congregating on that street. We think the address applies, if it doesn't, we fully recognize that he can't live there.

THE COURT: Okay. D is, you shall not have any contact with the victim, are there more than one victim?

MS. BELOHLAVEK: There's several.

THE COURT: Several, all of the victims. So this should be plural. I'm making that plural. You are not to have any contact direct or indirect, and in this day and age I find it necessary to go over exactly what we mean by indirect. By indirect, we mean no text messages, no e-mail, no Face Book, no My Space, по telephone calls, no voice mails, no

PHYLLIS A. DAMES, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 16 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 4 of 4

21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20 20

21

2222 2 23

24

25

messages through carrier pigeon, no messages through third parties, no hey would you tell so and so for me, no having a friend, acquaintance or stranger approach any of these victims with a message of any sort from you, is that clear?

THE  DEFENDANT:  Yes,  ma'am

THE COURT: And then it states, unless approved by the victim, the therapist and the sentencing court. Okay.

THE DEFENDANT: I understand.

THE COURT: And the sentencing court. So, if there is a desire which, I would think would be a bit strange to have contact with any of the victims the court must approve it.

MS. BELOHLAVEK: Correct. THE COURT: If the victim was under the age of 18, which was the case, you shall not until you have successfully attended and completed the sex offender program. So, is this sex offender program becoming a condition of probation?

MS. BELOHLAVEK: That is not. I don't believe I circled that one.

PHYLLIS A. DAMES, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 17 of 31

Case Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document Document 113-3 113-3

Entered Entered on  on  FLSD FLSD Docket Docket 05/22/2009 05/22/2009

Page Page 1 1 of of 4 4

# EXHIBIT B

# to

Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's

# Motion for No-Contact Order

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD

Document 16-2

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010

Page 18 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-3

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 2 of 4

# Podhurst  Orseck

TRIAL & APPELLATE LAWYERS

Aaron S. Podhurst
Robert C. Josefsberg
Joel D. Eaton
Steven C. Marks
Victor M. Diaz, Jr.
Katherine W. Ezell
Stephen F. Rosenthal
Ricardo M. Martínez-Cid
Ramon A. Rasco
Alexander T. Rundlet
John Gravante, III
Carolina Maharbiz

Robert Orseck (1934-1978)

Walter H. Beckham, Jr.
Karen Podhurst Dern
Of Counsel

April 17, 2009

VIA FACSIMILE

David Spicer, Esq.
11000 Prosperity Farms Road
Suite 104
Palm.Beach Gardens, FL33410

Robert Critton, Esq. Burman,, Critton, Luttier & Coleman LLP 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401

Jack Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian A venue South, Suite I 400 West Palm Beach. FL 33401

## Gentlemen:

Duringom- recent meeting with Mr.Black, wewere told that it is your client's position that the no-contact order agreed to during the state plea colloquy does not apply to any of our clients except for those victims who were part of Mr.Epstein's state plea Our understanding is that AUSA Villafana and Messrs. Tein and Goldberger entered a verbal agreement at the time that the list of victims was provided to those defense counsel.that Mr. Epstein, including his agents, would have· no direct or indirect contact with the victims named on this list .In addiditon, under applicable Florida Bar Rules governing contact by attorneys and their agents with persons represented by counsel, any contact with any of our clients or their family members by Mr. Epstein, his counsel and/or his agents must strictly be through us. Mr. Lefkowitz had previously reassured us that .Mr. Epstein would not contact any of our clients as longas I am "representing them in connection with settlement discussions." Due to om differences regarding the retroactivity issue and 1he "per plaintiff' v. per incident/count issue, we have apparently reached a dead end regarding settlement

Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130

Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346

www.podhurst.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 19 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-3

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 3 of 4

We are concerned that Mr. Epstein could misconstrue our impasse in conjunction with Mr. Lefkowitz' e-mail to mean that now that we are no longer "representing them in connection with settlement discussions," he may contact them. Please be assured that it is our position that regardless of whether weare representing our clients during settJement discussions and/or trial preparation, we, and the rules of professional conduct, prohibit contact.

In order to be crystal clear as to whom werepresent, we have attached a list of our present clients. We expect each member of Mr. Epstein's defense team to abide by the applicable rules of professional conduct We request written confirmation from Mr. Epstein that neither he nor his agents will contact any of the victims represented by us.

If this correspondence is in any way unclear, please contact us.

Sincerely,
<signature>
Robert C. Josefsberg

cc: Roy Black, Esq. w/ enclosures Jay Lefkowitz, Esq. w/ enclosures

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD

Document 16-2

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010

Page 20 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-3

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 4 of 4

List of Clients Represented by Podhurst Orseck P.A.

as of April 17, 2009 1

- Not a chart — image shows a heavily redacted/inked-over document fragment; original text is unreadable.
- Visible surrounding text provided: "as of April 17, 2009".
- Visual features: large vertical black block with three horizontal protrusions to the right; white background with small unredacted specks.

'We will supplement this list as necessary.

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 21 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-4

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 1 of 2

# EXHIBIT C

# to

Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's

# Motion For No-Contact Order

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 22 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-4

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 2 of 2

Page 1 of 1

## ROBERT C. JOSEFSBERG

| From:                                          | ROBERT C. JOSEFSBERG                           |
|-|-|
| Sent:                                          | Monday, May 18, 2009 4:46 PM                   |
| To:                                            | 'rcrit@bclclaw.com'; 'jagesq@bellsouth.net'    |
| Subject:                                       | Epstein No Contact Letter                      |
| Importance:                                    | High                                           |
| Attachments: No Contact Letter of April 17.pdf | Attachments: No Contact Letter of April 17.pdf |

Gentlemen:

On April 17, 2009 we sent your team the attached No Contact Letter. To date, we

have not heard back from you or any other members of Mr. Epstein's defense team. If we don't hear back from you by Wednesday, May 20, 2009, we will seek relief in court. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Robert C. Josefsberg

5/19/2009

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 23 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1of 3

# EXHIBIT D

# to

Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's

# Motion for No-Contact Order

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD

Document 16-2

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010

Page 24 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-5 Document 113-5

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 2 of 3 Page 2 of 3



# BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER
&  COLEMAN LLP

J. MICHAEL BURMAN, P.A.'
GREGORY W. COLEMAN, P.A.
ROBERT D. CRITION, JR., PA,
BERNARD LEBEDEKER
MARKT. LUTTIER, P.A.
JEFFREY C. PEPIN
MICHAEL J. PIKH
HEATHER MCNAMARA RUDA

FLORIDA BOARD CERTIFIED
CIVIL TRIAL LAWYER

# A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP

May 18, 2009

ADELQUIJ. BENAVENTB
PARALEGAL/INVESTIGATOR

BARBARA M. McKENNA
ASHLIB STOKEN-BARING
BETTY STOKES
PARALEGALB

RITA H. BUDNYK
OF COUNSEL

Katherine W. Ezell, Esq.
Robert Josefsberg, Esq.
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, FL 33130

Re: <empty>

Dear Kathy and Bob:

Additionally, Bob, you wrote a letter on April 17, 2009 stating your position regarding "No Contact" with any of your firm's clients based on your interpretation of the Non-Prosecution Agreement. I do not concede that your position is correct nor that the Non-Prosecution Agreement prevents some forms of contact with your clients.

LAWYER S

515 N. FLAGLER DRIVE / SUITE 400 / WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401 TELEPHONE (561) 842-2820 EAX (561) 844-6929 mail@bolciaw.com

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD

Document 16-2

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010

Page 25 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-5

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 3 of 3

May 18, 2009
Page 2

Cordially yours,
<signature>
Robert D. Critton, Jr.
RDC/clz
cc: Jack Goldberger, Esq.

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 26 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 1 of 3

# EXHIBIT E

# to

# Plaintiffs Jane Doe 101 and Jane Doe 102's

# Motion for No-Contact Order

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 27 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 113-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Page 2 of 3



# BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER
& COLEMAN LLP

J. MICHAEL BURMAN, P.A.'
GREGORY W. COLEMAN, P.A.
ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR., P.A.'
BERNARD LEBEDEKER
MARK T. LUTTIER, PA.
JEFFREY C. PEPIN
MICHAEL J. PIKE
HEATHER MCNAMARA RUDA

PLORIDA BOARD CERTIFIED
CIVIL TRIAL LAWYER

A  LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP

May 21, 2009

ADELQUI J. BENAVENTE
PARALEGAL/INVESTIGATOR

BARBARA M. MCKENNA
ASHLEE STOKEN-BARING
BETTY STOKES
PARALEGALS

RITA H. BUDNYK
OF COUNSEL

## Sent by E-Mail and U.S. Mail

Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq.
Katherine Ezell, Esq.
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, FL 33130

Dear Bob:

As I advised you yesterday, I am responding to your April 17, 2009 letter. As I stated in my e-mail, I think your request is unnecessary. Despite what Roy may have said to you, my client has had no contact with any of your clients. To my knowledge, the only one who has “breached" any agreement regarding contact is your own client, who, as I advised you in a letter last week, contacted Jack Goldberger's office looking for her settlement check. Mr. Goldberger, of course, did not speak with her.

Lawyers who represent Mr. Epstein are well familiar with the Rules of Professional Conduct, including Rule 4-4.2. At the same time, I am certain you are equally familiar with that Rule. The Comment provides "Parties to a matter may communicate directly with each other...".

To my knowledge, neither Mr. Epstein nor any attorney or agent of those attorneys who represent Mr. Epstein, have contacted or attempted to contact your clients. Given that it is not Mr. Epstein's intention to have direct contact with your clients, it is unnecessary to respond point by point to statements attributed to my co- counsel.

L•A•W•Y•E•R•S

515 N. FLAGLER DRIVE / SUITE 400 / WESTPALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401

TELEPHONE (561) 842-2820 FAX (561) 844-6929
mail@bclclaw.oom

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD

Document 16-2

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010

Page 28 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-6 Document 113-6 Document 113-6

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 3 of 3 Page 3 of 3

May 21, 2009

Page 2

Rather than to be concerned about what my client is doing, I would ask that you advise your clients not to contact Mr. Epstein's lawyers directly. Neither I nor the attorneys who represent Mr. Epstein want to be put in a position where we are set up by any of your clients.

Cordially yours,
<signature>
Robert D. Critton, Jr.

RDC/msc

cc: Roy Black, Esq.
Jay Lefkowitz, Esq.
J. Michael Burman, Esq.
Jack Goldberger, Esq.

Josefsberg.011.doc

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD

Document 16-2

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document 113-7

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010

Page 29 of 31

Page 1 of 4

## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

## SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

JANE DOE NO. 2,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
/ /

JANE DOE NO. 3,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80232-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
/ /

JANE DOE NO. 4,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80380-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
/ /

JANE DOE NO. 5,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80381-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD

Document 16-2

Page 30 of 31

Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010

Document 113-7

Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2009

Page 2 of 4

Defendant.
/

JANE DOE NO. 6,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80994-MARRA/JOHNSON

Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
/
JANE DOE NO. 7,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80993-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
/ <empty> /
C.M.A.,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
/ <empty> /

JANE DOE,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80893-MARRA/JOHNSON

Plaintiff,

vs.

Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD Document 16-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/11/2010 Page 31 of 31

Case Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM 9:08-cv-80119-KAM

Document Document 113-7 113-7

Entered Entered on on FLSD FLSD Docket Docket 05/22/2009 05/22/2009

Page Page 3 3 of of 4 4

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. II,
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80469-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 101,
CASE NO.: 09-CV-80591-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
JANE DOE NO. 102,
CASE NO.: 09-CV-80656-MARRA/JOHNSON
Plaintiff,

vs.

JEFFREY EPSTEIN,

Defendant.
/

## ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for No-Contact Order (DE

# _J, filed May 22, 2009. Plaintiffs represent that Defendant has not agreed to the relief
documents/doj-fb54f4281a94a419.pdf
{}