Epstein Forums

SJ: “We’re back on the video record at 1:15 p.m.” //

BE: “As it relates to the charges you plead guilty to, are you saying today that those females that you interacted with sexually were prostitutes prior to meeting you?” \\

JE: “So I plead guilty to the solicitation of prostitution.” //

BE: “Right, and you would certainly agree that that would require yourself and one other individual for that act of prostitution, correct?” //

MP: “Form. Also calls for legal conclusion” \\

JE: “I plead guilty to solicitation of prostitution.” //

BE: “So are you saying that those females that you that were the victims, at least listed as victims by the state, were prostitutes prior to meeting you?” \\

MP: “Form. Vague. Irrelevant.” //

JE: “I plead guilty to solicitation of prostitution.” \\

BE: “Do you have any remorse for your actions -” //

MP: “Form.” \\

BE: “- that led to your plead of guilty?” //

MP: “Form. Argumentative.” \\

JE: “I plead guilty to solicitation of prostitution. Not underage prostitution, simply prostitution.” //

BE: “Are you saying now that the subjects of that, which we’re calling victims, were not underage when you engaged in sex with them?” \\

MP: “Form. Argumentative, speculation and assumes facts not in evidence as well as mischaracterizes the witness’ testimony.” //

JE: “I plead guilty to solicitation of prostitution. Not underage prostitution. Solicitation of prostitution.” \\

BE: “I was of the impression that you plead guilty to a second degree felony, that being procuring a minor for the purposes of prostitution.” //

JE: “That’s correct.” \\

BE: “So minor is somebody under the age of 18 and I’m asking, for the guilty plea related to that count, are you at all remorseful for your interactions with that minor?” //

MP: “Same objections.” \\

JE: “What minor?” //

BE: “The charge is procuring a minor. You tell me, who was that minor?” \\

JE: “I don’t know.” //

BE: “You were never told during your - during the state attorney’s prosecution of you who this person was?” \\

JE: “No.” //

BE: “Why’d you plead guilty to a felony charge that resulted in you going to jail without even knowing who the victim was?” \\

MP: “Form. That question calls for attorney client information therefore I’m going to -” //

BE: “If it has something to do with any conversations with your attorney, I don’t want to know, I’m just going off of the plea coloquy[?] between you and the judge where you understood the charges and you advised and [unintelligible] the charges and you still willingly, willfully pled guilty to the charges. So, I’m taking now that you’re saying, you don’t even know what those charges were about -” \\

MP: “What was the question? I don’t know the question on the table now.” //

BE: “Who was the minor?” \\

JE: “I don’t know.” //

BE: “And you were never told the name or initials of that minor victim by the state attorney’s office or the prosecutor?” \\

JE: “Not that I recall.” //

BE: “Just so that the jury understands, this method of paying underage minor females to bring you other underage minor females for sex is something that you do in New York, in New Mexico, in Florida and everywhere. It’s not just west Palm Beach, isn’t that right?” \\

MP: “Again, form, it’s compound. Again it assumes facts not in evidence. It’s argumentative, it’s harassing and moreover we’ve already been down this road before in separate related questions that have already been asked and answered.” //

JE: “I’d like to respond to each one of your questions however today my attorneys advised me I cannot and they advised me I must assert my 6th amendment right, my 5th amendment right and my 14th amendment right under the US constitution. Therefore, that’s what I’m going to do.” \\

BE: “Where is the calendar schedule of your underage sex appointments?” //

MP: “Form. Speculation.” \\

JE: “Again? You said what?” //

MP: “What’s that again?” \\

BE: “Where is the calendar or schedule that [bleep] kept for you of your underage sex appointments. Your appointments for sex with underage females.” //

MP: “Same objection.” \\

BE: “And if there’s not one, you can tell me there’s not one.” //

JE: “I’d like to answer each one of your questions today, however I’ve been advised by counsel that I must assert my 5th amendment, 6th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution or risk losing their representation. Therefore, I’m going to have to assert those constitutional rights, though I’d like to answer that question.” \\

BE: “Are you still in possession of the computers that were taken from your house prior to the execution of the search warrant?” //

JE: “Again? Am I still -?” \\

BE: “Are you still in possession of the computers that were removed from your house just prior to the execution of the search warrant?” //

JE: “I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit. However, at the present time, my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions that may be relevant to this lawsuit, no matter how much I’d like to. So I must accept this advice or risk losing my 6th amendment right to effective representation. Therefore I must assert my rights under the 5th, 6th and 14th amendment to the US constitution.” \\

BE: “Who was it that removed those computers from your house prior to the execution of the search warrant?” //

MP: “[bleep] predicate.” \\

JE: “I intend - sorry - I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit. However at the present time my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot provide answers to any questions that may be relevant, no matter how much I’d like to and I must accept their advice or risk losing their representation. Accordingly therefore I have to assert those rights, Mr. Edwards.” //

BE: “To my understanding, [bleep] that this computer system contained the complete list of names of underage minor females with whom you engaged in sexual activity. Is that correct?” \\

MP: “I’m gonna object -” //

JE: “It’s your understanding? You’re asking for me to tell you what your understanding is?” \\

BE: “Did the computers that were removed from your home just prior to the execution of the search warrant, contain the complete list of underage minor females with whom you engaged in sexual activity?” //

MP: “Form.” \\

JE: “Though I’d like to answer that question, like all your other questions here today, unfortunately my attorneys have counseled me that I’m going to have to assert my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution. I - excuse me - I point out that your firm was described by the current US attorney as a criminal enterprise involving money laundering, creating and fabricating malicious cases of a sexual nature against people like me and others in order to fleece local investors out of millions of dollars. I believe the senior partner of that firm currently sits in jail. Unfortunately, though I’d like to answer all your questions, today my attorneys have counseled me I must assert my rights under the 6th amendment, 14th amendment and 5th amendment under the US constitution.” //

BE: “Isn’t it true that you and [bleep] operated as an organized criminal enterprise designed to sexually exploit minors?” \\

MP: “Objection. Argumentative, speculation, calls for legal conclusion and continues to assume to assume facts not in evidence.” //

JE: “Though I’d like to answer that question, Mr. Edwards, like most of your other questions here today, and hopefully will get to do so at some point, my lawyers have advised me that I must today assert my constitutional rights under the 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment of the US constitution, and I must accept their advice or risk losing effective representation.” \\

BE: “And as part of that organization, you developed code terms such as ‘work’ or ‘massage’ as opposed to ‘engage in sex’ with minors. Is that true?” //

MP: “Form. Argumentative, speculation, harassing, assumes facts not in evidence.” \\

BE: “You developed code terms such as -” //

JE: “Me?” \\

BE: “You would ask these girls if they would like to give you a massage or work for you rather than asking them to do what was going to be done which is engage in sexual activity with you. Isn’t that true?” //

MP: “Same objection. Objections.” \\

JE: “Are you asking if I developed code words? Is that the question?” //

BE: “Code words.” \\

JE: “I’d like to respond to that question. Unfortunately today my attorneys have told me I have to respond by taking - invoking my 6th amendment, 14th amendment and 5th amendment rights under the US constitution or risk losing my amendment right to effective representation. Accordingly, I assert my constitutional rights as guaranteed by those amendments.” //

BE: “What did it mean within your organization when someone, some underage minor female, was coming over to work for you?” \\

JE: “What did it mean?” //

BE: “Right, what did it mean? What did it mean to you what was going to happen when an underage minor female would either call to work or [bleep] would tell you this person is coming to work for you at a specific time?” \\

MP: “Objection. Vague, speculative, and assumes facts not in evidence.” //

JE: “I’d like to answer that question, as most of your other questions today. However, today my attorneys have counseled me that I must invoke my 6th amendment, 14th amendment and 5th amendment right or risk - and if I don’t, I risk losing them as my attorneys, so therefore I must assert those rights.” \\

BE: “You’re laughing as if my questions are ludacris right now, but you’re aware that there were trash pulls from your home where there were message pads, messages taken by various employees of yours where these terms ‘massage,’ ‘work’ were used in conjunction with underage minor females coming over to your house, aren’t you?” //

MP: “Same objections. Form, as well move to strike. And also assumes facts not in evidence. Lacks predicate.” \\

BE: “You’re aware of the trash pull and the message pads, correct?” //

MP: “Same objections. Do you have any documents with you here today that you speak of?” \\

BE: “No but at this point in time in the trial they’ll already be in evidence, so -” //

JE: “I’m aware of the trash - what’s a trash pull? I’m sorry.” \\

BE: “Are you aware of - I’ll ask it to you this way. When [bleep] would take a phone message for you, what would she write it down on?” //

MP: “Form.” \\

JE: “I don’t - the question makes no sense to me, sorry.” //

BE: “If another employee of yours were to answer the telephone, be it your housekeeper, house manager, would answer the phone, take a message for you and write it down so that you could read it later. What would that message be written on?” \\

JE: “Most likely paper.” //

BE: “Ok and is that paper typically in the form of a message pad that has a carbon copy sheet to the back?” \\

JE: “No.” //

BE: “Ok. You’re unfamiliar with the documents that I’m talking about, that being a message pad that informed you as to who called, the time that they called and a purpose for calling.” \\

MP: “And for purposes of the question, we’re specifically talking about a message pad, nothing related to what you’re defining as a trash pull, just what someone takes as a message at [bleep] -” //

JE: “Do I know what a message pad is?” \\

BE: “No, do your - in your home, do you typically have your housekeeper, house manager, somebody else when they take a message for you, write it on a specific pad that informed you as to who’s calling, the time they’re calling and the purpose for them calling and there’s a carbon copy sheet evidencing that message?” //

MP: “Objection. Asked and answered.” \\

BE: “You know what I’m talking about. I mean -” //

JE: “I know what a message pad is.” \\

BE: “Do you know what the messages - do you use them commonly in your home or did you back prior to your arrest?” //

JE: “I’d like to answer that question but today my attorneys have advised me I have to assert my 5th amendment, 6th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution. So therefore, I’m going to do that or I risk losing their representation.” \\

BE: “Is my question to you confusing? I mean, do you know what I’m talking about?” //

MP: “Form.” \\

JE: “Not specifically, no.” //

MP: “Ok. The information -” \\

JE: “Is there something you have to show me so I can - so that I know what you’re talking about?” //

BE: “I don’t have it to show you today but if my if the information in evidence that I have learned through this process is accurate and correct, it would seem a foregone conclusion that you and I would be on the same page, at least about this document. So, if we’re going to get to a point where you tell me hey this document doesn’t exist, or I don’t know what you’re talking about at all, ok that’s fine, but that’ll - that’s something that [bleep]. So here’s my question. When a housekeeper or house manager would take a message for you from any caller, is there a specific message pad that has a carbon copy located near your telephones for them to write down the name of the caller, the purpose for the call and the time called?” \\

MP: “Form.” //

BE: “Is that something you’re familiar with?” \\

JE: “I’d like to respond to that question today my attorneys have counseled me that I must assert my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment right under the US constitution.” //

BE: “So you’re invoking your 5th amendment rights, it’s not that you don’t understand the question, you understand my question and you’re electing to invoke your 5th amendment rights, correct?” \\

JE: “Yes.” //

BE: “Ok. When [bleep] housekeeper or house manager whoever happened to be employed at the time would take messages what form would you normally or typically receive them in?” \\

MP: “Same objections.” //

JE: “I don’t understand the question.” \\

BE: “When a caller would call the home, house manager or housekeeper or [bleep] I don’t know what to call her - assistant? Would answer the phone and take a message for you so that you would know who called, what would they typically write down the message on so that you would have -” //

MP: “Objection. Object to form, it lacks predicate. You have not established anything here today relative to a housekeeper, a house manager or the like. I’m trying to understand your question. It lacks predicate, yeah.” \\

JE: “Piece of paper?” //

BE: “This is gonna play well. Normally they would write it down on a piece of paper?” \\

JE: “Yes sir.” //

BE: “And give it to you.” \\

JE: “I didn’t say that.” //

BE: “Ok. When someone calls the house and you’re not the person who answers the phone - strike that. Have you ever been given a message that is ripped out of a message pad that has a carbon copy to it?” \\

JE: “I see. Ok. Well, I intend, I would like to answer that question but today my attorneys have advised me I must respond by invoking my 6th amendment right, my 5th amendment right and my 14th amendment rights under the US constitution. Though I’d like to answer these questions. Accordingly I must assert those rights or risk losing my representation for today.” //

BE: “Between the years 2002 and 2005, who was your house manager? And if there’s more than one, tell us that.” \\

JE: “The questions unclear, I’m sorry.” //

BE: “Ok. Let me start with between 2002 and 2005 did you employ a house manager?” \\

MP: “Form.” //

JE: “Where?” \\

BE: “At your Palm Beach home.” //

JE: “I intend to respond to all relevant questions here today [bleep] hopefully we’ll get some, but my attorneys have advised me that today I must invoke my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution or risk losing them as counsel. So today I’m going to have to assert those privileges.” \\

BE: “Do you know [bleep]?” //

JE: “I intend to respond to all relevant questions regarding this lawsuit. However at the present time, no matter how much I’d like to answer that question, I cannot. Cuz my counsel - have told me I have to invoke my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment or in fact risk losing their representation. Therefore I’m going to have to assert my rights under those.” \\

BE: “[bleep] was a female born in July of 1988.” //

JE: “Is that a question?” \\

BE: “Not yet. When is the first time that you met her?” //

MP: “Objection, speculation.” \\

BE: “That assumes he did meet her, is that the - is that what you’re saying?” //

MP: “Your question assumes exactly what you just said which is not been established on the record yet pursuant to the appropriate Florida rules of civil procedure and the evidence lacks predicate.” \\

BE: “Ok.” //

JE: “That being said, I’d like to answer that question but today my attorneys have counseled me that I cannot and they’ve advised me that I must assert my 6th amendment right, my 14th amendment right and my 5th amendment right under the US constitution. Ms. [unintelligible], will you throw me one of those little sucky candies? Appreciate it.” \\

BE: “Isn’t it true that you met [bleep] for the first time in July or August of 2002 just before her 14th birthday?” //

MP: “Same objections.” \\

JE: “You know, your firm has been accused by the US attorney of perpetrating one of the largest frauds in south Florida’s history by crafting sexually charged lawsuits against people like me and others in order to fleece unsuspecting investors here in south Florida out of millions of dollar, the firm with you and Mr. Jaffrey. The US attorney has described it as a bogus schemes contrived by your firm. I’d like to answer every one of your questions here today, however my attorneys have counseled me that I may not and they’ve advised me that I have to invoke my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution. Therefore that’s what i’ll do otherwise I risk losing their representation.” //

BE: “Isn’t it true that [REDACTED] as a 13 or 14 year old girl was taken to your house by another underage minor female that being [bleep]?” \\

MP: “Form.” //

JE: “Tissue please. It’s like an exhibit. I would like to answer that question like all the other questions you’ve asked me here today. But today my attorneys have counseled me that I must assert my 6th amendment right, my 5th amendment right and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution. Therefore, that’s what I will do.” \\

BE: “You know [bleep] is, right? She had a lawsuit against you previously.” //

MP: “Form.” \\

JE: “Who? Again? The last name?” //

BE: “[bleep].” \\

JE: “Could you spell it for me?” //

BE: “Well the pseudonym that she used in her lawsuit against you alleging similar facts to those alleged in LM[?] vs. Jeffrey Epstein was C M A vs. Jeffery Epstein.” \\

JE: “And now the question?” //

BE: “You know who she is, correct?” \\

MP: “Form.” //

JE: “I’d like to answer that question here Mr. Edwards but unfortunately today my attorneys have counseled me that I must invoke my 5th amendment, my 6th amendment and my 14th amendment rights under the US constitution and if I don’t I risk losing their representation. Therefore I must assert those rights.” \\

BE: “When I asked you about [bleep] you sat there for awhile thinking hard about whether or not you knew them. Do you remember either [bleep]?” //

MP: “Move to strike. Counsel’s statement - the statement as worded assumes facts certainly not in evidence, it’s argumentative, speculates as to what is thinking hard and counsel I don’t understand the question on the table combined with your narrative. So if you could repeat the question.” \\

BE: “Sure, sure. I’m asking if during this questioning process has it refreshed your recollection as to who [bleep] is or do you really have no idea who that is?” //

MP: “Form. Asked and answered.” \\

JE: “Do you wanna ask one question or two questions, what do you want first?” //

BE: “Do you remember [bleep]?” \\

JE: “I’d like to answer that question. I’d like to answer that question today however my attorneys today have advised me that I must assert my 14th amendment, 5th amendment and 6th amendment rights under the US constitution. No matter how much I’d like to answer these questions. So, unfortunately I’m going to assert those rights.” //

BE: “When you first met [bleep] isn’t it true that she was just about to begin her 9th grade year in high school?” \\

MP: “Same objections. Form.” //

JE: “I believe her testimony in front of the FBI, in a sworn deposition, says something else, but I don’t recall exactly what. I don’t have any recollection.” \\

BE: “Of [bleep]?” //

MP: “Form.” \\

JE: “You asked the question when I met her. If I met her?” //

BE: “Ok. So you have no recollection as to when you met her?” \\

JE: “I don’t have any recol - if I ever met - I just told you I did read her FBI statement so I know what she has said. That’s not what you’ve just represented to me.” //

BE: “Your only memory of [bleep] - strike that. Your only knowledge of any interaction you may have had with [bleep] is derived from an FBI statement that she gave, is that true?” \\

JE: “I believe what you’ve just represented she said was not what she had sworn to.” //

BE: “No, no, no, I’m not asking what she said, I’m asking do you independently remember if she was entering into her 9th grade year in high school when you met her? Independent of anything you’ve read.” \\

MP: “I’m gonna move to strike. The diatribe between [bleep] I’m confused as to what question is on the table now.” //

BE: “Ok. Independent of anything you’ve ever read, do you remember meeting [bleep] just before she entered into her 9th grade year in high school?” \\

JE: “I’d like to answer that question however my attorneys today have advised me that though her own statements are contradictory to what you’ve just said, has sworn statements to the FBI contradict what you’ve just said, I have to invoke my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment rights of the US constitution.” //

BE: “Just a few minutes ago, when I asked when you met her, you said I don’t know if I’ve ever met her. So is that your testimony that you don’t know if you’ve ever met [REDACTED]?” \\

JE: “My testimony is very clear, I must assert the rights that my attorneys have asked me to assert today. Though her testimony under oath to the FBI is not what you represented it to be to me. And the ladies and gentlemen of the jury will watch this.” //

MP: “Form.” \\

BE: “Ok. And we’ll get into that. When you first came into the room today, didn’t you look at me and say I like [bleep] statement that you made to me?” //

MP: “Form. Move to strike.” \\

JE: “I don’t believe I said that.” //

BE: “What do you - what is it that you believe you did say referencing [bleep] when you sat down in that seat prior to the camera rolling?” \\

MP: “Form. Counsel, I was here during that whole time and I don’t recall any such thing.” //

BE: “You weren’t in the room.” \\

JE: “I don’t remember. I don’t know.” //

BE: “So is your testimony right now that you did not say to me I like [bleep]?” \\

MP: “Objection.” //

JE: “Correct.” \\

BE: “Do you like [REDACTED]?” //

MP: “Form. Predicate. And relevance.” \\

JE: “I’d like to answer all your questions here as I’ve tried to do my best however my attorneys have advised me that I must assert my 6th amendment 14th amendment and 5th amendment rights under the US constitution.” //

BE: “When you first met [bleep] isn’t it true that you knew she was an economically disadvantaged girl that needed money?” \\

MP: “Objection. Speculation. Assumes facts not in evidence and it’s argumentative as worded.” //

JE: “I’d like to answer all your questions here today [bleep] however on advice of counsel I have to assert my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution or risk losing those my right to effective representation. So accordingly I must assert those rights as guaranteed by the 6th, 5th and 14th amendments.” \\

BE: “And when she was a 14-year-old girl she was taken into your bedroom and you ordered her to take her clothes off, is that correct?” //

MP: “Objection. Vague, confusing. As to her, I’m not quite sure who you -” \\

BE: “Ok. When [bleep] was a 14-year-old girl she was taken up to your bedroom and you ordered her to take her clothes off. Isn’t that true?” //

MP: “Objection. Speculation and assumes facts not in evidence. Lacks predicate.” \\

JE: “Though once again what you’ve just represented to me is in total contradiction to the FBI sworn statement that I read of [REDACTED]. I must unfortunately respond by asserting the rights demanded by my attorneys today, which is my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment right to - against - sorry, given by the US constitution. Though her sworn testimony is exactly the - does not purport in any way what you just said.” //

BE: “And when she, when [bleep] was 14 years old, you ordered that she begin to give you a massage while she was naked and you were naked, isn’t that true?” \\

MP: “Same objections.” //

JE: “Sorry, repeat the question.” \\

BE: “When [REDACTED] - when [bleep] was a 14 year old girl -” \\

JE: “Right. Yes?” //

BE: “You laughed and said right about what?” \\

JE: “I heard the first part of your question. I’m sorry, that I understood it.” //

BE: “When [bleep] was a 14 year old girl isn’t it true that you received a massage from her while she was naked and you were naked?” \\

MP: “Objection. Speculation, assumes facts not in evidence, lacks predicate.” //

JE: “I understand that your firm has been accused by the US attorney of south Florida as perpetrating one of the largest frauds in Florida’s history by crafting malicious sexually charged allegations against people like me. I understand that Ms. Miller’s testimony is not that what you’ve just described though she swore to the FBI that under oath and though I’d like to answer your questions here today, my attorneys have advised me I may not and must assert my 6th, 5th and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution or risk losing their representation. Restroom break?” \\

BE: “Excuse me?” //

JE: “Restroom break?” \\

BE: “Alright. We’re stopping -” //

SJ: “Going off the video record at 1:49 pm.” \\

SJ: “We’re back on the video record at 2:04 p.m.” //

BE: “[bleep] was a 14 year old girl, isn’t it true that while you were naked on the massage table, you ordered [bleep] to take off her clothes and provide you a massage?” \\

JE: “I believe you’ve asked that question.” //

BE: “I don’t know where we left off, that’s why.” \\

MP: “Form. Argumentative, speculation, compound and assumes facts not in evidence and [unintelligible]. But we did take a break so [unintelligible].” //

JE: “The current US attorney has described your law firm as - sorry - the current US attorney has described your law firm as a criminal enterprise involved in fabricating sexually charged cases against people like me in order to fleece unsuspecting investors out of millions of dollars. They used words like bogus schemes. Unfortunately at this time in response to your questions though I’d like to answer each and every one I’m going to have to, on advice of counsel, assert my 6th amendment 5th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution. Though I’d like to answer those questions.” \\

BE: “[bleep] a naked 14 year old girl providing you a massage you ordered her to pinch her nipples during that massage, is that true?” //

MP: “Same objections. Argumentative, speculation, harassing, assumes facts not in evidence and lacks predicate.” \\

JE: “I asked her to pinch her nipples?” //

BE: “Pinch your nipples.” \\

JE: “I believe her own sworn testimony contradicts that statement however and I’d like to answer all your questions here today but my attorneys have advised me that at least today Mr. Edwards, I must take my constitutional privilege of the 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment, keeping in mind that your firm you and Mr. Edwards and Mr. Jaffey here has been accused by the US attorney of perpetrating one of the largest frauds in Florida’s history by crafting multiple sexual charged lawsuits against people like me to fleece from local people millions of dollars.” //

BE: “And during this massage by [REDACTED], you began to masturbate in front of her, isn’t that true?” \\

MP: “Same objections.” //

JE: “Again, unfortunately I’d like to answer each one of your questions here today, my attorneys have counseled that today at least I have to assert my 5th amendment, 6th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution otherwise I risk losing their effective representation and the fact that your firm has been accused of fabricating these malicious lawsuits to fleece investors out of millions of dollars and described by the US attorney here in south Florida as a criminal enterprise involved in mail fraud, money laundering. Unfortunately I’d like to answer each question but I can’t today.” \\

BE: “Isn’t it true that while you were masturbating you inserted your fingers into her 14 year old vagina?” //

MP: “Objection. Argumentative, speculation, harassing, it assumes facts not in evidence and the question continues to lack predicate and I also believe your question was asked and answered some time ago.” \\

JE: “Though I’d like to answer each one of your questions here today Mr. Edwards my counsel has told me I cannot answer any questions that may be relevant to this lawsuit. The fact that your firm has been accused of major fraud. The largest fraud in south Florida’s history by the US attorney, calling your firm a criminal enterprise involved in money laundering. I believe it’s racketeering but I could be wrong, monetary transactions, wire fraud, mail fraud, conspiracy. I’d like to answer your questions but today on advice of counsel I'm going to have to assert my rights.” //

BE: “Isn’t it true also that while [bleep] was a 14 year old female you [bleep].” \\

MP: “Same objections incorporated.” //

JE: “Again, the question?” \\

BE: “Isn’t it true that during this sexual massage while you - that you masturbated to the point of [bleep]?” //

MP: “Argumentative. Speculation. Compound. It’s vague, it assumes facts not in evidence and lacks predicate.” \\

JE: “Though I’d like to answer that question with specificity and detail today, I’m - no matter how much I’d like to, my attorneys have advised me that I cannot. They advised me I must assert my 5th amendment, 6th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution or potentially effective representation so therefore I will assert those rights.” //

BE: “Isn’t it true that the ritual that I’m describing occurred with [bleep] approximately one hundred times when she was between the ages of 13 and 16?” \\

MP: “Same objections with the additional objection of vague and confusing.” //

JE: “Since your firm has been involved in - by the - call to the US attorney crafting these fraudulent lawsuits in order to fleece local investors and the fact that, I believe in [REDACTED]’s sworn statements, that’s what you’ve just alleged at least is totally contradicted by the client’s own sworn statements. Though I’d like to answer these questions today, my attorneys advised me I may not and they advised me I must assert my 5th, 6th and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution or potentially risk losing effective representation.” \\

BE: “In addition to the sexual abuse directly against [REDACTED] [bleep] that I’ve described, isn’t it true that you also paid her money to bring you more than 50 other underage minor females for you to similarly abuse?” //

MP: “Same objections.” \\

JE: “Though I believe in her own sworn testimony to the US government, she contradicts your assertions and I’m sure maybe you’ll have some explanation at trial but the ladies and gentlemen of the jury should know about your firm being accused by the US attorney of perpetrating one of the largest frauds in US history by crafting malicious lawsuits with a, of a sexual nature in order to fleece investors out of millions of dollars, local investors. And though I’d like to answer your questions in detail today [bleep] my counsel says I may not and they’ve asked me to assert those rights, which I must unfortunately -” //

BE: “You keep bringing up this fraud of the former law firm known as [bleep] in response to my questions, so I’d like for you to tell the jury at this time, which allegation are you now saying is fraudulent or untrue? That is being made by [bleep].” \\

MP: “Form. Confusing, compound and irrelevant.” //

BE: “It was only made relevant by his answers.” \\

MP: “Same objections.” //

BE: “Do you understand the question?” \\

JE: “No.” //

BE: “Ok. You made reference to this - in response to my questions about what you did sexually to [bleep] - you have responded with these fraud allegations against the firm of Rothstein, Rosenfeld, Adler I want you to tell the jury which allegations that [bleep] is making against you are you disputing at this time or calling a fraud or calling untrue -” \\

MP: “Confusing, compound and if the court reporter would read back Mr. Epstein’s response I think you’ll see the way you just phrased the questions mischaracterizes his testimony. Cause - I’m gonna keep it there. Unless you - want me to go further?” //

BE: “No, I want him to go further.” \\

MP: “Ok. Mischaracterizes the witness's testimony.” //

JE: “[bleep] own statements contradict every one of your allegations you’ve made to me today as a hypothetical in her own words and you and a potential reasons that concern me that the law firm that represented [bleep] and two others have been accused by the US attorney of fraudulently producing cases against me and others to fleece investors in what he’s described as one of the largest frauds in south Florida’s history. So, it concerns me. It’s a factor in the way I’m thinking about answering.” \\

BE: “Each time that you [bleep] you paid her $200, is that correct?” //

MP: “Objection. Argumentative, speculative, it’s harassing, it assumes facts not in evidence and with regard to this line of questioning the court has already ruled that the demeanor in which you’re presenting this question is improper and harassing so if you would -” \\

BE: “I’m uncomfortable with the demeanor right now - these are just the facts of the lawsuit. The facts are outrageous and I understand that but they have to be asked.” //

MP: “Maybe - maybe the demeanor and tone of your question is laced in a manner that it’s proper for the video but the content of the question is the same exact harassing question that was deemed by the judge to be argumentative. I’m not saying that he’s not going to answer your question, but that he doesn’t know what his answer’s going to be but what I’m saying is could you rephrase the question?” \\

BE: “Answer the question and I’ll work on rephrasing it for you -” //

JE: “I forgot what the question was.” \\

BE: “Isn’t it true that each time that you interacted with [bleep] [bleep] you paid her $200 each time?” //

JE: “I’d like to answer -” \\

MP: “Form. Sorry, go ahead.” //

JE: “I’d like to answer each one of your questions here today, however, my attorneys have counseled me I have to assert my 5th amendment 6th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution and I’m cognizant of the fact that your firm has crafted these malicious lawsuits. It’s been reported that the lawsuits are of a sexual nature, in order to fleece investors. So, though I’d like to answer those questions, Mr. [bleep] I must keep my counsel’s advice.” \\

BE: “And isn’t it true that for each underage minor that [bleep] brought to you for the purposed of you engaging in sexual activity, you paid her $200?” //

MP: “Objection. Speculation, it’s a compound question and it assumes facts not in evidence and therefore lacks predicate.” \\

JE: “Though I’d like to answer that question as most of your other questions here today, [bleep] I intend to respond hopefully at some point to all of your questions however today my attorneys advised me I must invoke my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution.” //

BE: “Over the course of relatively, roughly three years, isn’t it true that you touched or fondled [bleep] in a sexual manner on more than fifty occasions?” \\

MP: “Objection. Argumentative, calls for speculation, it’s over broad, confusing and vague and it assumes facts not in evidence.” //

JE: “Could you repeat the question for me? I’m sorry, Mr. Edwards.” \\

BE: “Sure, the three year period between 2002 and 2005 when you were engaging in sexual conduct with [bleep] isn’t it true that that conduct took place on more than fifty occasions?” //

JE: “I’d -” \\

MP: “Same objections.” //

JE: “I believe if you read your own clients FBI statements, when her statement changed dramatically after she decided to file a different lawsuit at the request of you and your firm, one of your firms, it’s been many firms it seems who’ve been accused of major fraud. Since the testimony has changed dramatically, I would like to answer those questions but today my attorneys have advised me I must assert my 6th amendment right, my 5th amendment right and my 14th amendment right.” \\

BE: “Your answers are not going to incriminate you if the answer is no, it’s only if the answer is yes that it’s going to incriminate you so aren’t you telling the jury that every single thing I’ve asked you it’s not part of a fraud it just happens to be true.” //

MP: “Objection. Argumentative, irrelevant and move to strike. And I’m just simply going to instruct the witness not to answer that question cuz it - I don’t understand it. I don’t know what to say about that question.” \\

BE: “Your - all of the things that I’ve told you or that I’ve asked you about, you touching her while she was underage you paying her for sexual conduct those are all things that really happened, there’s nothing about that that anybody’s fabricated or made up, is there?” //

MP: “I’m gonna object. Argumentative, speculative, it assumes facts not in evidence, it certainly mischaracterizes the witness’s testimony all day since I’ve been here and I’ve been here the whole time and it assumes facts not in evidence and it’s also over broad and substantially compound cuz you’re attempting to incorporate all of your questions today into one question.” \\

BE: “I think that you know Mr. Pike the juror objections should be limited to the form and if you object to the form -” //

MP: “Ok I’m sorry, that’s - you’ve asked me several times here today to tell you why and I just - I thought I was helping I’m sorry. But I certainly will try to keep objecting to the form.” \\

BE: “Thank you. And your answer is?” //

JE: “You’ll have to repeat the question.” \\

BE: “Every single allegation that [bleep] has made and that I have now questioned you about in terms of your sexual involvement with [bleep], they are all true, isn’t that correct? I mean there’s nothing fabricated about any of these allegations, right?” //

MP: “Objection. Argumentative, speculative, compound, it’s vague, over broad -” \\

BE: “You’re objecting to form?” //

MP: “Yeah, assumes facts not in evidence and lacks - that is form.” \\

JE: “And I would like to answer those - that question specifically today however on advice of counsel they’ve suggested I take the 6th amendment, assert my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution. Keeping well aware of your firm’s responsibility in the largest fraud in Florida’s history by crafting sexually charged lawsuits against people like me and others. I believe in addition since her allegations as you’ve phrased them have changed dramatically since her sworn statement in fact after the joined the [bleep] most of her statements have changed.” //

BE: “Do you remember when [REDACTED] became pregnant when she was 16 years old, don’t you?” \\

MP: “Form. Relevance, and move to strike.” //

JE: “I would like to answer each one of your questions here today, Mr. Edwards, each and every one of your questions. However today my counsel has told me I must assert my 6th amendment, 14th amendment and 5th amendment rights under the US constitution.” \\

BE: “And isn’t it true that when [REDACTED] was 14 years old, 15 years old and 16 years old you touched her genitals?” //

JE: “Separate from the fact that her own testimony her own sworn testimony under oath before she decided to file a lawsuit for money there was never any discussion about anything like that. I would like to answer that question but my attorneys advised me at least today, that I must assert my 6th amendment, 5th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution.” \\

BE: “And isn’t it true when she became pregnant at age 16 you no longer interacted with her sexually but still demanded that she bring you other underage minor females for you to sexually exploit?” //

MP: “Objection. Speculation. Compound. Harassing and assumes facts not in evidence.” \\

JE: “I believe her testimony changed dramatically from her sworn statements to the FBI -” //

BE: “That’s not a responsive answer, so I’m not going to - he can answer to her - let’s move to strike it -” \\

MP: “The witness is trying there’s a legal, you know, basis for you - if there’s a legal basis for your move to strike then it will be taken up by the court you can move to strike.” //

BE: “Strike it as non-responsive.” \\

MP: “You can continue.” //

JE: “Fine. Since the allegations you keep throwing at me relate to fact that Ms. Miller’s testimony after giving a sworn statement to the FBI changed dramatically after she decided to file a lawsuit for money, joining your firm that’s been accused by the US attorney of one of the largest frauds in Florida’s history. I would like to answer those questions however on advice of council today I must assert my 5th amendment, 6th amendment, and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution.” \\

BE: “And when [REDACTED] was a pregnant 16 year old, she brought you at least 10 underage minor females during her pregnancy, isn’t that true?” //

MP: “Objection. Argumentative, speculation, it’s vague and assumes facts not in evidence and lacks predicate.” \\

JE: “I unfortunately would like to answer that question as well as every other question you’ve asked me here today, but my attorneys have advised me that I must assert my 5th amendment, 6th amendment and 14th amendment rights under the US constitution.” //

BE: “And after [REDACTED] had her son at 16 years old, when you were being criminally investigated for some of the conduct that we’ve discussed here today, isn’t it true that you personally hired and retained and paid for an attorney to represent [REDACTED]?” \\

MP: “Objection. Speculation and form. Compound.” //

BE: “[unintelligible].” \\

MP: “I will not, I’m allowed to assert the basis for my objections, I am not limited to just saying form. I’m able to assert the basis as to why so I don’t waive that basis.” //

BE: “It’s just more of this obstructionist -” \\

MP: “It’s not obstructionist, it’s objecting to form and what’s obstructionist is what we’re doing right now. I’m gonna be finished within 4 seconds. So I’m gonna object to form, argumentative, it’s speculative and it assumes facts not in evidence and it lacks predicate.” //

JE: “I’m sorry. Again?” \\

BE: “The response.” //

JE: “I know but - the question.” \\

BE: “You don’t remember the question - did you hire [REDACTED] an attorney at some point in time? Do you remember that?” //

MP: “Same objections.” \\

JE: “Not to the best of my recollection.” //

BE: “Do you know James Eisenberg?” \\

JE: “Do I know James Eisenberg? I don’t believe I ever met James Eisenberg,” //

BE: “Is it your testimony today then that you never paid for an attorney to represent [REDACTED]?” \\

JE: “On advice of my counsel, I’d like to answer that question but on advice of counsel I’m going to have to assert my 6th amendment, 14th amendment and 5th amendment rights against - excuse me, 6th amendment rights of the US constitution.” //

BE: “And that attorney that was paid for by you informed [REDACTED] that if she were to tell the FBI exactly what happened at your house that her son could be taken from her? You’re aware of that, correct?” \\

MP: “Same objections.” //

JE: “I recognize that, I believe she made that one of the statements under her deposition after she decided to sue me for a bunch of money and your firm has represented a number of cases of a sexually charged nature that turned out to be fraudulent in order to fleece local investors. The US attorney described your firm and these cases as a bogus scheme. I’m aware of that and I’d like to answer your question in more detail today, Mr. Edwards, however, my attorneys have advised me that at least today, I must assert my rights under the 6th amendment, 14th amendment and 5th amendment.” \\

Woman: “Come in.” //

{unintelligible background chatter}

JE: “Is it food?” \\

BE: “It’s the food.” //

Man: “[unintelligible] walking in the room with depositions [unintelligble].” \\

MP: “Absolutely. I agree.” //

JE: “Alright. You ready?” \\

BE: “Yeah, you want a break now?” //

JE: “Thank you.” \\

SJ: “Going off the video record at 2:29 p.m.” //



https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/D ... 182657.m4v

Length: 1:55:22

Part 2: viewtopic.php?t=449

Note: This is a continuation of the video interview taken in EFTA00182656