1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2222 2 20

21

22

23

24 20

25

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

STATE OF FLORIDA )
)
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.

) CASE No. 2008CF009381AXX

ORIGINAL

D COPY

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT

PRESIDING: HONORABLE JEFFREY COLBATH

APPEARANCES:

ON BEHALF OF THE STATE:
BARRY E. KRISCHER, ESQUIRE
State Attorney
401 North Dixie Highway
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
By: BARBARA BURNS, ESQUIRE
R₁ Assistant State Attorney

2009 JUL-1 PM 3:30

FILED

NOT A

ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT: OF
JACK GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE
250 S Australian Ave Ste 1400
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
And
ROBERT CRITTON, ESQUIRE
515 N Flagler Dr Ste 400
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

ON BEHALF OF THE PALM BEACH POST:
DEANNA SHULLMAN, ESQUIRE
Thomas, LoCicero & Bralow
101 N. E. 3rd Avenue Ste 1500 -
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

ON BEHALF OF THE INTERVENER:
WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQUIRE
BRAD EDWARDS, ESQUIRE
225 NE Mizner Blvd Ste 675
Boca Raton, Florida 33432

SCANNED JUL - 6 2009

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER



2

1

2

3

4

5

6 01

7

8

9

10

11

12 འ

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

2222222

23

24

25

| ON    | BEHALF  OF  -                         |
|-|-|
|       | MOTION  INTERVENER'S  PLEADING:       |
|       | SPENCER KUVIN, ESQUIRE                |
|       | 2925  PGA  Blvd  Ste  200             |
|       | Palm  Beach  Gardens,  Florida  33410 |

NOT A CERTIFIED COPY

June 26, 2009
Palm Beach County Courthouse
West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
Beginning at 9:59 o'clock, a.m.

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

3

1 2

3

4 5

6700 or
8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

2222222

23

24

25

THE COURT:

MR. GOLDBERGER: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: et me call up the State

of Florida vers Epstein. Let's have

NOT A CERTED COPY everyone announce their appearance, please,

name on he record.

MR. CRITTON: Robert Critton and Jack

Goldberger on behalf of Mr. Epstein as well

as Barbara Compiani from the office of Jane

Walsh.

BE IT REMEMBERED that the following proceedings were had in the above-entitled cause before the HONORABLE JEFFREY COLBATH, one of the judges of the aforesaid court, at the Palm Beach County Courthouse, located in the City of West Palm Beach, State of Florida, on June 26, 2009, beginning at 9:59 o'clock, a.m., with appearances as hereinbefore noted, to wit: THEREUPON:

MS. SHULLMAN: Deanna Shullman of Thomas, LoCicero and Bralow on behalf of the Palm Beach Post.

MR. KUVIN: Spencer Kuvin on behalf of the intervener- MS. BURNS: Barbara Burns on behalf

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

4

1

2 3 4 5 600 9

7

8

10

11

12

13
3 4

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

NOT

of the State of Florida.

THE COURT: That's it.

MR. CRITTON: That's it, it's a wrap.

THE COURT: Okay. Orders. Who's not

here that I have to mail it to?

MR. GOLDBERGER: Mr. Edwards is not

here, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Mr.

Mr. Edwards. Did I give you enough copies

of the order?

ERTIFIED CORY MR. GOLDBERGER: I ran out. I have

just enough. want me to get a copy

to Mr. Edwards?

Yes, if you'd mail a copy

I got spares if anybody's

Anybody need a spare?

MR. GOLDBERGER: We're good, your

Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Motion to

Stay, Mr. Goldberger.

MR. GOLDBERGER: Thank you, your

Honor.

THE COURT: Mr. Critton. MR. CRITTON: Good morning, Judge Colbath, do you have a copy of our Motion

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER



[x]

5

1 2 3 4 5

69

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

NA
22

23

24

25

to Stay?

THE COURT: I do, the one that was handed up to me yesterday?

MR. CRITTON: Yes, sir, and I have a proposed order in the event the Court chooses to grant; may I provide that to the Court as well? Your Honor, as you know, Mr. Goldberger and I represent Mr. Epstein. We have hired Ms. Walsh and Ms. Compiani as appellate counsel to assist in the filing CERTIFIED COPY of a writ of certiorari. I know that comes as no surprise to the Court in that whoever prevailed an lost yesterday, I think the Court recognized we probably filed a writ

NOT

THE COURT: Let me ask real quick. Anybody objecting to the defendant having the ability to have my decision reviewed by the appellate court before I release these things? I mean, it seems pretty straight forward.

MS. SHULLMAN: We have an objection, your Honor, to some extent. The -- you know, the procedure in place here is very

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

6

1 2 3

4 5 65

6700 or
8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21
2222 22

23

24

25

similar to that for which they would have to obtain a preliminary injunction.

THE COURT: Right.

MS. SHULLMAN: So to demonstrate

likelihood of success and irreparable harm,

I don't think they can do that. I think

the plan that you put in plan that you put in -- --

yesterday is a good one, that is you redact is a good one, that is you
COR
and you release on Monday and that gives you release on Monday and that

them today and Monday to get to the Fourth, today and Monday to get to the

otherwise, we're stuck in a position where we're stuck in a position

we have a 30-day have a 30-day ndow to appeal, and we ndow to appeal,

are all delay, delay, delay. FRIEND all delay, delay, delay.

What if I do that? I What if I do that?

if it's a difference with that if it's a difference with

or distinction, but, procedurally, I was distinction, but, procedurally,

NOT

thinking I was leaning yesterday towards issuing the order that I just issued. I think that that's a fairly accurate rendition of the written version of my oral pronouncement yesterday, but I order that nothing that the redacted orders not be released until -- I'll make it, you know, five of five Monday. That will give you Monday to get down to the Fourth to get

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER



7

1 2 3 4 5 6200 a

7

8 8

a 9 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2222222 20

21

23

24

25

them to stop this from being released; what do you think?

MR. CRITTON: Here's what the problem

is, Judge, is Ms. Compiani and Ms. Walsh

spoke to them yesterday and today, we need

a transcript from the hearing yesterday

which has not yet been obtained. They need

the the underlying motions, they need some time underlying motions, they need

to to research. It's not a matter of simply research. It's not a COP matter of

filing filing a writ of petition and that stays a writ of petition and that

the release of the order the release of the order There would have There

to be a separate motion that would be filed to be a separate motion that would

with the Appellate Court. The Motion to with the Appellate Court. The
CHRINED
Stay that we file under Appellate Rule Stay that we file under Appellate

9.310 9.310 bsection bsection A, it provides that the A, it provides

party that seeks review shall come to the party that seeks review shall come

lower tribal, which is the trial court, lower tribal, which is the trial
A
which which is you, in this instance, and then is you, in this instance, and

it's it's within your discretion either to stay within your discretion either

or or not to stay under the circumstances, and not to stay under the circumstances,

we we simply don't have the time within which simply don't have the time within

to file the appeal under those

circumstances.

NOT

There are two criteria that have to be met here, one is the likelihood of

SUSAN s. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

8

1 2

3

4 562 00 0
7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21
22222222

N

23

24

25

We believe that based upon the Court decision, respectfully, that the Court, that the Appellate Court, will quash your order, for the reasons Judge Puccillo was the one who requested that the document in this -- this was argued yesterday, so NOT A FRIEND CORY I'm going to be very brief. She is the one who requ sted post sentencing, that the document be filed under seal. It was her request that the defense seceded to that under the circumstances. That certainly was inadvertent, could have just as easily remained under seal with Mr. Goldberger or with the State Attorney under those

harm where no stay is granted, and the second criteria, not necessary mutually exclusive; that is, you don't have to have both of them, but you certainly have to give an indicia of both of them. The second one is the likelihood of success on the merits.

circumstances.

Secondly, that it relates to the portions of it, specifically, within the MPA to deal with the grand jury proceeding,

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER



9

1

2 3 4 5 6 N

6

670 0
8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

222 20

21

2222 222
23

24

25

that would be a violation of Federal Rule Six. I note you just handed us your order about two minutes ago, Judge, so no one's had an opportunity to review it, certainly appellate counsel has not had an opportunity to review it. I don't know if you dealt with the appellate rule, but I do note that within your written order, that you, basically, said that in the second to last page, you said this order is no way to be interpreted as permission not to comply with U.S. District Court Judge Marra's previous orders

NOT A CERTIFIED CORY We respectfully submit that it would not comply with Judge Marra's previously We also believe that the supremacy clause, as Mr. Goldberger argued yesterday in conjunction with comity principle, that we think that there's a substantial likelihood on success of the merits on this.

With regard to the likelihood of

harm, this is a paramount issue here. It's undisputed that this was a confidential agreement. It's a confidential contract

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER



10

1

2

3

4

5

6700 0

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

22222 21

23

24

25

between Mr. Epstein and the United States. United States vigorously defended Mr. Edwards when he came into federal court and filed an action to have the MPA released, Judge Marra subsequently entered an order. Another attempt that was made to make the MPA public again.

All plaintiffs' counsel has it.

The only ones that don't have it is the

Post, under the circumstances, and public

under the circumstances. but all the

plaintiffs' lawye of the alleged victims, CERTIFIED COR

they either hav the MPA and the addendum,

which I will refer to as the MPA, or they

have the ability to get that. That is very

from Judge Marra's order.

NOT

So there's certainly no harm to the plaintiffs from under these circumstances. And the harm in this instance is only to Mr. Epstein under the circumstances because as Judge Letz (phonetic) once said, it's very much like an attorney/client privilege or a privilege document where once the proverbial horse is out of the barn, you can't get him back in.

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

[x]

11

We cited a case called Mariner versus Baker 3 -- So. 39, So.2d 608 First District 1989. In the Mariner case, this was not a usual incident report and the Court, I know your Honor previously did a great deal of personal injury work and related work, you're very familiar. In fact, you commented yesterday and said, I don't see how the MPA is going to be admissible in a civil proceeding anyway. Again, you're not ruling on that ultimately, the judges in both the State and federal court cases will do that.

1 2

3

4 567

650

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21
22222222

23

24

25

NOT A CERTIFIED COR

In the Mariner case, the judge ordered that the defendants object at the direction of incident reports. The judge said, sorry, you've got to produce those incident reports. And the Court said, give them to me under seal because, again, we are talking about incident reports as distinct from an agreement between two parties which was deemed to be confidential between the United States government and Mr. Epstein. Only irreparable harm here as to Mr. Epstein because if it's released,

SUSAN s. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

12

1

2

3 4 5

67% 0
8 8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15 34562

16

17

18

19

20

22222 21

23

24

25

you cannot remedy that harm on appeal.

And in the Mariner case, if the judge

said, if you put the documents under seal,

which is exactly the situation we have now

is, I will grant the stay and let the

appellate court determine whether or not

incident reports, which have a much lower

threshold threshold for production or for for production or for discovery
COR
reasons, and, again, there's no harm in an reasons, and, again, there's no harm

instance instance like that, like that, even in an incident even in an

report came out in the Mariner cases, So report came out in the Mariner cases,

what. what. It won't be used, you can't use any It won't be used, you can't

of of the informat the informat on you obtained. on you obtained. In this In
CERTIFIED
particular instance, because it is particular instance, because it is

confiden confiden there there is no way the Court can is no way the

NOT

With regard to the defendants in this With regard to the defendants
A
case, again, I think we've demonstrated case, again, I think we've

both irreparable harm, and we believe a both irreparable harm, and we believe

substantial likelihood on the success. substantial likelihood on the

Again, how do you demonstrate a substantial Again, how do you demonstrate a

likelihood on the success? The fact that

we would if this Court thought that we

should prevail, my guess, you would not

have ruled as you did, but as the Court is

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

13

1

2

3

4

5

6700 o

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21
22222;

23

24

25

aware, oh, surprise to all of the lawyers here. Sometimes judges get reversed. I know that's a shock to most of the lawyers in this room and most of the courts, but that happens on occasion, and, therefore, we believe we can show through the supremacy clause, the grand jury reference that we will prevail and that your order will be quashed.

With regard to alleged harm by any other party, the Post in this instance reported at the se tencing of Mr. Epstein on or about June 30th of 2008. They waited NOT A CERTIFIED COP. until June st of '09. This was such a pressing the Post wanted to get this ately out to the public, they were so anxious to do it, that they waited 11 months before they did anything.

Mr. Edwards, who is not here today, filed a federal court action and those issues were talked about and discussed at some length with regard to Judge Marra's two orders.

Judge Marra's rule, you can't get them, if you want to get them, go to that

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

14

1 2

3

456 -00 20 7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

17

18

19

2622222221 20

23

24

25

NOT

case, that would be Judge Hafele or two of

Mr. Edwards' cases are where is Mr. Kuvin's

case is or Judge Marra, where Mr. Edwards'

case is. Judge Marra can certainly control

whether or not they should be released, and

I've covered Mr. oh, and Mr. Edwards

because he could have gone back to Judge

Marra because he's got one federal COPY court

case -- -- did did he try for that form and get he try for that

C
it -- -- no, they came in here. no, they came in here. He tried to

do it in a run around Judge Marra. it in a run around Judge

He didn' file his motion until He didn' file his

late May of '09 My guess is it was late May of '09 My guess is
CERTIFLER
Mr. Edwards who probably said to the Post, Edwards who probably said

don't don't you join in this, you you join in

been here for 11 months, why don't been here for 11 months,

you come in now, maybe intervene. maybe And then

Mr. Kuvin, on behalf of his client, [ ]

estate court case, came in on June 11th,

again, almost a year to the date after

Mr. Epstein's sentence.

It's no burning issue, there's no fire here to put out, giving us 30 days, or at least a reasonable period of time to file petition for writ, and then if the

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

15

1

2

3

4562 00 0

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

17

162822222 19

20

23

24

25

Court denies our stay at least asking the appellate court for stay under the circumstances. There's no harm to them. The harm is only to Mr. Epstein, and we think as a substantial likelihood, that we would succeed.

Therefore, Therefore, Therefore, Therefore, we would request the we we we would would would request request request

Court Court grant a stay as I've suggested in my Court Court grant grant grant a a a stay stay stay as as as I've I've I've suggested suggested suggested
COR COR COR
proposed order for 30 days of giving proposed proposed proposed order order order for for for 30 30 30 days days days of of of giving giving giving

Ms. Ms. Walsh and Ms. Compiani an opportunity Ms. Ms. Walsh Walsh Walsh and and and Ms. Ms. Ms. Compiani Compiani Compiani an an an

to actually do their job under the to to to actually actually actually do do do their their their job job job under under under the the the

circumstances, circumstances, circumstances, circumstances, the the the the court reporter court court court reporter reporter reporter

doesn't have to work over the weekend to doesn't doesn't doesn't have have have to to to work work work over over over the the the weekend weekend weekend
CERTIFIED CERTIFIED CERTIFIED
expedite tra scripts for us, and secondly, expedite expedite expedite tra tra tra scripts scripts scripts for for for us, us, us, and and and

within within within the 30 days, then let the within the the the 30 30 30 days, days, days, then then then

appellate court determine whether or not appellate appellate appellate court court court determine determine determine whether whether whether or or or

the stay remains or not. the the the stay stay stay remains remains remains or or or not. not. not.
A A A

NOT NOT NOT

THE COURT: THE THE THE COURT: COURT: COURT: Thank you much. Thank Thank Thank you you you much. much. much.

Ms. Ms. Ms. Ms. Shullman, don't worry about Shullman, Shullman, Shullman, don't don't don't worry worry worry

responding to the issue of motive or responding responding responding to to to the the the issue issue issue of of of motive motive motive or or or

seeking this relief or the timing of your seeking seeking seeking this this this relief relief relief or or or the the the timing timing timing of of of

request or party's request. I don't think

that bears upon the merits of either

parties.

MS. SHULLMAN: The constitutional

SUSAN s. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

16

1

2

3

4

5 6 ∞ σ 7

8

9

10 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

right of access doesn't have a waiver provision, your Honor.

THE COURT: Well, go ahead. Let me

hear I'm on board so far with Mr. Critton's version of, Judge, if you let it out, you let it out, so irreparable harm is kind of easy. I think that it is a two-prong test. I think he's got to jump over both hurdles. I think he's got to show some likelihood of success. If you want to spend some energy arguing that there's no irreparable harm, you may do so, but if I hand out today and everybody gets to see it. you can't fix that

NOT A CERTIELD COPY

MS. SHULLMAN: Sure.

THE COURT: So I think they've

established that.

MS. SHULLMAN: Let me address that very briefly first, your Honor, to remind you in meeting this burden that they failed to meet yesterday, they identified four interests which they liken now to the motion to stay to the four harms.

One, of -- for the first three of

SUSAN s. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

17

1 2 3

4

5 6
6

N 7

500 o 8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18
22 22
19

20

2 2 2 2 2 21

22

23

24

25

NOT NOT

them, they mentioned they have no standing

to assert the compelling government

interest, the government didn't show up,

the imminent threat to the administration

of justice, again, that's the government's

issue. The innocent third party privacy

rights, rights, they have no standing. rights, they they have have no no standing. standing. The The The only

one is, he's not really articulated today one one is, is, he's he's not not really really articulated articulated
COR COR
it's some sort of invasion of Mr. Epstein's it's it's some some sort sort of of invasion invasion of of Mr. Mr.

privacy rights. privacy privacy rights. rights.

Florida law is clear that those Florida Florida law law is is clear clear that that

who who are participan who are are participan participan in in in crimes do not have crimes crimes do do not not

privacy rights privacy privacy rights rights ith respect to the facts. ith ith respect respect to to the the
CERTLEIED CERTLEIED
and circumst and and circumst circumst nces surrounding those crimes. nces nces surrounding surrounding those those

'm going hear something outside 'm 'm going going hear hear something something

of the context of Mr. Epstein's criminal of of the the context context of of Mr. Mr. Epstein's Epstein's

prosecution, he has no privacy right in prosecution, prosecution, he he has has no no privacy privacy right right
A A
this this this agreement. agreement. agreement.

THE COURT: Let me share with you THE THE COURT: COURT: Let Let me me share share with with

what what I'm thinking about doing, even at the what I'm I'm thinking thinking about about doing, doing, even even

conclusion conclusion conclusion of Mr. Critton's presentation, of of Mr. Mr. Critton's Critton's

and that is deny the motion to stay, but

delay the release of the records in

question until noon Friday. That will give

them a little bit of time to see if the

SUSAN s. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER



[x]

18

1

2

3

4

5

67∞ o
8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21 2222222

23

24

25

Fourth sees this case from a different vantage point, a different light, and maybe they'll look down and say, oh, Judge Colbath, you missed it and, you know, stay the matter. That will give them a reasonable amount of time to get the transcripts to go to the Fourth because I'm a big fan of appellate review and making case law.

NOT A CERTIFIED COP

MS. SHULLMAN: And I understand, your Honor, if you are suggesting a week from today, that's a little bit long. Remember the status quo we are in sort of a strange procedural posture because your Honor decided that the initial closure was er, but the recent request for closure was denied, so instead of a status quo where we have a document that should be released, it's under seal where it shouldn't be, so any moment that it is kept under seal is a serious deprivation of the public and the press's right to access, which you have already determined they have, we think you are correct, of course, so I would ask that any stay

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

[x]

19

MR. CRITTON: She's pandering, your

12

3

4

5 6 ∞ σ 6700

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

22222 19

20

21

22

23

24 24

25

Honor.

MS. SHULLMAN: I will say he

respectfully disagreed with you, so I think

a week is too long. I do this day in and

day out, I have spent many a weekend on

these matters in my career. to

give them till Tuesday, I'll be

the Fourth will act quickly on this. I

don't think that a week's delay is

necessary. I think fact, it under

minds the public purpose here.

THE COURT All right. Any other

NOT A CERTIEND CORY
respondents to go anything further?

SHULLMAN: The State Attorney's

also advises me that Friday is a

holiday and the courts are closed.

THE COURT: Thank you for telling me

that. Friday is a holiday.

MR. KUVIN: July 4th.

THE COURT: The day of the birth of

our constitution.

MR. KUVIN: Good morning, your Honor.

On behalf of intervenor obviously, the

Court is inclined to delay the disclosure

SUSAN s. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

20

1

2

3

4

5600 0 7 7

8 8

0 9 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20
2222
21

23

24

25

of this, but under Rule 9.310, if your

Honor were to issue such a stay, we would point out the provision C of the rule, which requires a posting of the bond.

We not only agree with your Honor's

ruling, but we believe such appeal they are

filing is absolutely frivolous and we are filing is absolutely frivolous and we

going to be requesting fees and going to be requesting fees and cost for cost
CORY
the the filing of that appeal, filing of that appeal, as a result, as a

we we are requesting a bond be posted if a are requesting a bond be posted if a

stay of any type is issued in this case stay of any type is issued in this case

because of the fact that we want to make because of the fact that we want to make

sure sure that our that our torneys' torneys' fee and costs are fee and costs
CERINTEL
covered covered for the frivolous nature of the for the frivolous nature of the

appeal appeal And And it's dictated strictly in it's dictated strictly in

subsection subsection A. It gives the Court the A. It gives the Court the

NOT

authority. authority. It It says: says:
A
A stay pending review may be A stay pending review may be

conditioned conditioned upon a good and sufficient upon a good and sufficient

bond, bond, other conditions or both. Therefore, other conditions or both.

we believe your Honor does have the we believe your Honor does have the

authority to issue such a requirement that

the posting of a bond be issued.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you very much. I will deny the motion to stay.

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER



21 21

1

2 3 4 5 6 ∞ 0

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17
2222222222 2 2

18

19

20 20

21

22

23

24

25

I will delay the release of the documents until noon Thursday. I will deny the request to compel the movant, the defendant, Mr. Epstein, to post a bond, and I'll let the appellate court tell us and teach us what the law on this case will be.

It's always interesting how these

cases unfold and come to us a little
COPY
different than everyone else. Now, let me

have the attorneys come up here and

approach.

(The followin proceedings were held

sidebar, out of the hearing of the jury.)

NOT A CERTIFIED COR I reviewed the two

documents didn't see any kids' names in

Everybody was hinting the

children's names or the initials' names.

had my big black highlighter out, I don't

see anything worth redacting, so.

I

MR. GOLDBERGER: It's the plaintiff's

document that identifies the children's

names. It's a letter to me actually.

THE COURT: I was wondering if everybody thought there was something in there that wasn't in there.

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

22

1

2 3 4 5

5

6

7
6 0 0

8

9

10

11

12
22

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

MR. CRITTON: It's a test of your skills, your Honor.

THE COURT: You're right, exactly. One is page one through seven, and the second one is just two pages that's not even signed by everybody.

MR. GOLDBERGER: While we're all up

here chatting, there are references to

other names up here.

THE COURT: Yes, Mr. Goldberger, and

no one has identified in the document says

these are people that are not going to be

prosecuted. Kuvin made the argument

NOT A CERTIFIED COR that these are co-conspirators. These are

innocent people that have nothing to do

with these proceedings. They have nothing

MS. SHULLMAN: They have a standing. THE COURT: I will renew my ruling that I gave you yesterday, and deny your request to redact those names out of there. All right, so I'll hang on to these till Thursday at noon, and anybody that comes wants to come and get them, I don't know if there's a mechanism for -- I stand on the

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

23

1

2 3 4

5 6 ∞ σ 7

8

9

10

11

12
22

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

courthouse steps and pass them out. MS. SHULLMAN: If there are no redactions to be made.

THE COURT: No redaction.

MS. SHULLMAN: I would do an order

directing the Court to release them and

they may become unsealed. You don't

need

MS. COMPIANI: are you

going to write up a written order

denying

MR. GOLDBERGE Are you going to do

that?

NOT A CERTIFIED COPY Put together a written

order?

SHULLMAN: Denying the stay?

THE COURT: Yes, A, denying the stay;

B, delaying the disclosure or unsealing of

these documents until noon Thursday; C,

denying the motion for bond.

MR. GOLDBERGER: And you'll need that

order quickly.

THE COURT: Yeah, fax that and we'll

get it signed quick today.

MR. GOLDBERGER: Are you forcing the

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

24

1 court reporter to work over the weekend so

2 we can get a transcript?

3 MR. CRITTON: Thank you, your Honor,

4 for moving us this morning.

5 (Side bar conference held outside the

6 hearing of the jury concluded.)

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 14 NOT A CERTIFIED COPY

15

46 16

17

18

19

20

21
222222

23

24

25 25

SUSAN s. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

[x]

25

1 2

3

4

5 6-

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

## CERTIFICATE

THE STATE OF FLORIDA,

COUNTY OF PALM BEACH.

I, SUSAN S. WIGGINS, R.P.R., Official

Court Reporter for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Court Reporter for the Fifteenth Judicial

Criminal Division, in and for Palm Beach County, Criminal Division, in and for Palm COPY Beach

Florida; do hereby certify that I was authorized Florida; do hereby certify that I was

to and did report the foregoing proceedings before to and did report the foregoing proceedings

the Court at the time and place aforesaid; and the Court at the time and place aforesaid; and

that the preceding pages numbered from 1 to 24, that the preceding pages numbered from 1 to

inclusive, inclusive, represent represent true and accurate true and accurate
CERTIEND
transcription of my stenonotes taken at said transcription of my stenonotes taken at said

proceedings. proceedings.

IN IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto

affixed affixed my official signature this 29th day of my official signature this 29th day
A

NOT

Susan S Wiggins
SUSAN S. WIGGINS,R.P.R.

SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
documents/doj-7ab720b8e31cae82.pdf
{}