Court Records
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLED Docket 11/09/2009 Page 1 of 26
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 08-CIV-80119-MARRAJ
JANE DOE NO. 2,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
Related cases:
08-80232, 08-08380, 08-80381, 08-80994,
08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469,
09-80591, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092
THIRD PARTY WITNESS, IGOR ZINOVIEW'S,
MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND
INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW
Third Party Witness, Igor Zinoview's, ("Mr. Zinoview") by and through his
undersigned attorney, moves this Court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) for a protective
order regarding his deposition and as grounds therefore would state:
1. As reflected on the affidavit of Igor Zinoview, attached as Exhibit A, he
works for Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Mr. Epstein") as a driver and bodyguard. He did
not know Mr. Epstein before November of 2005. He first became employed by Mr.
Epstein in November of 2005.
2. Additionally, Mr. Zinoview would testify as set forth on his affidavit, that
at no time has he discussed with Mr. Epstein any issues involving Mr. Epstein's criminal
case nor any of the cases or issues involved with civil plaintiffs.
1
EFTA02743361
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 2 of 26
3. In many of the depositions, counsel for L.M. and E.W., has asked them as
witnesses to assume certain facts about which they have no knowledge, and he then asks
their opinions about certain facts. See Exhibit B -Epstein's Motion for Protective Order
to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions.
4. There is no information which Mr. Zinoview has relating to the facts and
circumstances surrounding any of the pending civil cases, in that none of their allegations
directed to Mr. Epstein extend beyond September of 2005. Therefore whatever
information Mr. Zinoview may have, postdates that time.
5. Regarding the scope of discovery, Judge Linnea noted in her
October 28, 2009 Omnibus Order (DE #377), "[w]hile the scope of discovery is broad, it
is not without limits. Washington v. & Williamson Tobacco 959 F.2d 1566,
1570 (11th Cir. 1992). ... Courts have long held that `[w]hile the standard of relevancy
[in discovery] is a liberal one, it is not so liberal as to allow a party to roam in the shadow
zones of relevancy and to explore matter (sic) which does not presently appear germane
on the theory that it might conceivably become so.' Food Lion Inc. v. United Food &
Commercial Workers Intern. Union, 103 F.3d 1007, 1012-13 (CA. D.C. 1997) (string
cite omitted)."
6. Rule 26(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, provides that, "[a] party or
any person from whomn discovery is sought may move for a protective order in the court
where the action is pending.... The court may, for good cause, issue an order to protect
a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or
expense, including one or more of the following: (A) forbidding the disclosure or
discovery;"
EFTA02743362
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 3 of 26
7. As set forth in his affidavit, Mr. Zinoview cannot possibly have any
knowledge or information that is presently germane to this action. Accordingly, the
Court should enter a protective order prohibiting his deposition.
WHEREFORE, third-party witness moves this court for a protective order
pursuant to Rule 26(c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that his deposition not take
place or the questioning be limited.
By:
JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER ESQ.
Florida Bar No. 262013
jagesa®bellsouth.net
Rule 7.1 Certification
I hereby certify that counsel for the movant has conferred or attempted to confer
with opposing counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the discovery issues prior to the
filing of this motion for protective order but has been unable to do so.
Certificate of Service
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed
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 following Service List in
the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of November, 2009
Respectfully submitted,
By:
JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER ESQ.
Florida Bar No. 262013
[Email Redacted]
Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012
[Phone Redacted]
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)
3
EFTA02743363
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 4 of 26
Certificate of Service
Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey E stein
Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/
Stuart S. Mermelstein, Esq. Brad
Adam D. Horowitz, Esq.
Mermelstein & Horowitz, P.A.
18205 Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 2218
Miami, FL 33160
[Phone Redacted]
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
[Email Redacted]
ahorowitzfasexabuseattorney,com
Counsel for Plaintiffs
In related Cases Nos. 08-80069, 08-80119,
08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80993,
08-80994
Richard Horace Willits, Esq.
Richard H. Willits, P.A.
2290 10th Avenue North
Suite 404
Lake Worth, FL 33461
[Phone Redacted]
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.
08-80811
[Email Redacted]
Jack Scarola, Esq.
Jack P. M, Esq.
Seamy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley,
P.A.
2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard
West Palm Beach, FL 33409
[Phone Redacted]
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
[Email Redacted]
[Email Redacted]
Counsel for Plaintiff C.M.A.
Bruce Reinhart, Esq.
Bruce E. Reinhart, P.A.
250 S. Australian Avenue
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Esq.
Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler
401 East Las Olas Boulevard
Suite 1650
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: [Phone Redacted]
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
bedwards©rra-law.com
Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.
08-80893
Paul G. Cassell, Esq.
Pro Hac Vice
332 South 1400 E, Room 101
Salt Lake City, UT 84112
[Phone Redacted]
[Phone Redacted] Fax
[Email Redacted]
Co-counsel for Plaintiff Jane Doe
Isidro M. Esq.
Law Firm, P.A.
224 Datum Street, Suite 900
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
[Phone Redacted]
[Phone Redacted] F
isidrogarcia©bellsouth.net
Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.
08-80469
Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq.
Katherine W. Ezell, Esq.
Podhurst Orseck, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, FL 33130
[Phone Redacted]
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
[Email Redacted]
[Email Redacted]
Counsel for Plaintiffs in Related Cases
Nos. 09-80591 and 09-80656
Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq.
4
EFTA02743364
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 5 of 26
[Phone Redacted]
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
ecf brucereinh rtl w.com
Counsel for Defendant
Theodore J. Leopold, Esq.
Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq,
Leopold, Kuvin, P.A.
2925 PGA Blvd., Suite 200
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
[Phone Redacted]
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
[Email Redacted]
Counsel for Plaintiff in Related Case No.
08-08804
Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012
[Phone Redacted]
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
jaciescP.bellsouth.net
Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein
EFTA02743365
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 6 of 26
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 08-CV-80119-MARRA-..
JANE DOE NO. 2,
Plaintiff,
v.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
Related Cases:
08-80232, 08-80380, 08-80381, 08-80994,
08-80993, 08-80811, 08-80893, 09-80469,
09-80581, 09-80656, 09-80802, 09-81092.
AFFIDAVIT OF IGOR ZINOVIEV
STATE OF FLORIDA ) SS
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH )
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev
having personal knowledge and being duly sworn, deposes and says:
1. My name is Igor Zinoview.
2. I began working for Mr. Epstein in November of 2005.
3. I did not know him until I began working for him.
4. I have never discussed nor has he ever attempted to discuss with me any facts or
information relating to any legal matters in which he is involved.
5. I work for Mr. Epstein as his driver, bodyguard and trainer.
EXHIBIT A
EFTA02743366
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 7 of 26
Page 2
FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
I hereby Certify that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer
oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared Igor Zinoviev known to me to be the
person described in and who executed the foregoing Affidavit, who acknowledged before me
that he/she executed the same, that I relied upon the following form of identification of the above
named person: X 1/4yr ?Anew., tdo , and that an oath was/was not taken.
WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this
day of NJ. et 2009.
Z co
01
P NAME 1
NOTARY PUBLIC/STATE OF FLORIDA
COMMISSION NO.:
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:
(SEAL)
EFTA02743367
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 8 of 26
1
IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM
BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO. 502008CA028051XWMB AB
L.M.,
Plaintiff,
v.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER TO
PROHIBIT INAPPROPRIATE DEPOSITION QUESTIONS
Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ("Epstein"), pursuant to Rule 1.280(c), Florida
Rules of Civil Procedure, moves for a protective order to prohibit argumentative,
harassing and inappropriate questions in depositions, and states:
1. At numerous depositions, Plaintiffs counsel has repeatedly asked
argumentative and harassing questions that are irrelevant and not reasonably
calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
2. In particular, Plaintiffs counsel has asked questions that improperly
sought to illicit lay opinions from fact witnesses, asked questions regarding witnesses'
feelings towards Mr. Epstein and their beliefs regarding media reports of this case,
asked whether they would leave their children with Mr. Epstein and asked whether they
would go back to work for Mr. Epstein assuming the media reports were accurate,
among other things. These questions and the responses thereto will never be
admissible. They are argumentative, irrelevant and seek speculative answers and
inadmissible lay opinions.
EXHIBIT
EFTA02743368
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 9 of 26
Lio v, Epstein
Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB
Epsteln's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions
Page 2 of 9
3. For example, in the deposition of Larry Visoski, one of Mr. Epstein's pilots,
Plaintiffs counsel asked the following questions seeking to obtain Mr. Visoski's beliefs
and opinions on Plaintiffs allegations:
Q. All right. When you read in the newspapers the
allegations that Mr. Epstein was involved with numerous
underage girls for sexual reasons, were you surprised?
A. I didn't believe it.
Q. Do you believe it today?
A. I don't believe it.
Q. You don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein was involved with
underage girls in a sexual way?
MR. CRITTON: Form.
THE WITNESS: You're asking for my opinion, and I don't
think my opinion is relevant in that matter.
BY MR.
Q. I think it's relevant. Can you just tell me whether today
you believe that Jeffrey Epstein has engaged in sex with
underage girls?
MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation, irrelevant, always.
THE WITNESS: It's irrelevant.
BY MR.
Q. I need an answer.
A. I don't believe he had sex with underage women.
Q. Or engaged in any sexual acts with underage women?
MR. CRITTON: Form.
EFTA02743369
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 10 of 26
L,M v. Epstein
Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBA8
Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions
Page 3 of 9
THE WITNESS: No.
BY MR.
Q. You think that this is just a story that a bunch of
underage women have made up?
A. Speculation.
• * * *
Q. Then we'll handle the question this way: If you were to
believe based on information and evidence that Mr. Epstein
engaged in sex or some form of sex acts with people of the
age range of 12, 13, 14, 15 years old, would you continue
your employment with Mr. Epstein?
MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation.
THE WITNESS: I would certainly be speculating
and I have to discuss it with my wife long and hard. I don't
think I could give you a correct and honest answer at this
time.
See Excerpts of Deposition of Larry Visokski at 66-67; 181-82 (attached as
composite Exhibit A). Other examples of similar improper questions are included in
Exhibit A.
4. Not only do these questions seek improper lay opinions, Plaintiffs counsel
asked Mr. Visoski his belief as to the truth of hearsay newspaper articles. The
foregoing questions are obviously irrelevant, argumentative and not reasonably
calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
5. Moreover, whether Mr. Visoski would continue working for Mr. Epstein if
Plaintiff's allegations are true has absolutely no relevance to any claim or defense in this
case. The questions are simply improper and meant to harass and embarrass the
EFTA02743370
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 11 of 26
I
M
v Fostein
Case No. 50200BCA028051XXXXMBAB
Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions
Page 4 of 9
witness.
6. Mr. Visoski was questioned for over four hours and much of the time was
wasted on irrelevant and harassing questions.
7. Plaintiff's counsel asked similar questions at the deposition of Larry
Eugene a, another one of Mr. Epstein's pilots:
Q. Certainly you've read certain newspaper articles about
the allegations, police reports, otherwise, the allegations that
occurred or have been alleged to have occurred at his Palm
Beach mansion, correct?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Correct?
A. Correct.
Q. Given the nature of those allegations, would you leave
your daughter of 17, 16, 15 years old with Mr. Epstein
alone?
MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike.
A. Yes.
Q. And despite pleading guilty to procuring underage girls
for the purposes of sex, you still feel comfortable leaving a
13, 14, 15-year-old girl around him?
MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike.
A. Yes. I mean, with my daughter, yes. I don't know how
he behaves around anybody else. I just know that the
respect that he showed me, I feel safe with my daughter.
Q. And have you read in detail the reports as to what
happened at his house with the girls?
EFTA02743371
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 12 of 26
Is v. Eostelq
Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB
Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions
Page 5 of 9
A. Only —
MR. PIKE: Form.
A. — what's been in the newspapers and published.
Q. If you read and hear testimony given - well, I can tell
you now - testimony has been given in this case that what
happens is: A 13 or 14 year old is led upstairs by herself,
told to get naked, he lays down on his back, there is a brief
massage before he turns over, exposes himself erect,
masturbates while he tells this 13 or 14 year old to pinch his
nipples as hard as she can while he inserts his fingers into
their vagina and ejaculates all over them before saying,
"Take your money and leave."
MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike.
BY MR. EDWARDS:
Q. Okay? Then, "You can continue to come back for $200
every time or every girl you bring me within your age group
and I get to do this again, I pay you $200 per person." If that
is the testimony --
MR. PIKE: Form.
Q. — that what happens behind closed doors with him, do
you still feel comfortable leaving a 13 or 14 year old in a
room with Jeffrey Epstein?
MR. PIKE: Form.
A. If that, in fact, is what actually happened, no.
Q. [Would you] go back - considering what you've read and
what you may or may not believe - would you go back to
working for Jeffrey Epstein?
MR. PIKE: Form.
A. I can't say. I still work for him on a maintenance - to
EFTA02743372
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 13 of 26
LM v. Epstein
Case No. 502008CA028051XXXXMBAB
Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions
Page 6 of 9
maintain the airplanes and stuff like that, so.
See Excerpts of Deposition of Larry Eugene at 135-36; 175-76; 184
(attached as composite Exhibit B).
8. Again, whether Mr. would work for Mr. Epstein "considering what
[he has] read and what [he] may or may not believe" (i.e. considering hearsay media
accounts and inadmissible lay opinion) has no bearing on the instant case.
9. In addition, questions regarding whether Mr. would leave his
children alone with Mr. Epstein could have only been meant to harass and embarrass
Mr. Nevertheless, Mr. testified that he would leave his children with
Mr. Epstein. As Plaintiffs counsel was obviously not happy with the answer to this
question, he proceeded to press Mr. with inflammatory statements until he got
the answer he wanted.
10. Plaintiffs counsel has also asked the same improper line of questions in
other witnesses' depositions.
11. The above-cited questions exceed the bounds of permissible discovery;
they have absolutely no relevance to this case. Accordingly, the Court should enter a
protective order prohibiting such questions and should sanction Plaintiffs counsel if
such inappropriate questions are asked at future depositions.
12. Regarding the scope of discovery, Judge Linnea noted in her
October 28, 2009 Omnibus Order,' "[w]hile the scope of discovery is broad, it is not
1 The Omnibus Order (DE #377) was entered in the federal companion case Jane Doe No. 2 v, Epstein
Case No. 08-CIV-80119 MARRS! In the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida.
EFTA02743373
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 14 of 26
LM v. Epstein
Case No. 502008CA028051X=MBAB
Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit inappropriate Deposition Questions
Page 7 of 9
without limits. Washington v. OM& Williamson Tobacco, 959 F.2d 1566, 1570 (11th
Cir. 1992). ... Courts have long held that '[w]hile the standard of relevancy [in
discovery] is a liberal one, it is not so liberal as to allow a party to roam in the shadow
zones of relevancy and to explore matter (sic) which does not presently appear
germane on the theory that it might conceivably become so.' Food Lion. Inc. V. United
Food & Commercial Workers Intern. Union, 103 F.3d 1007, 1012-13 (C.A. D.C. 1997)
(string cite omitted)." See also Capco Properties, LLC v. Monterry Gardens of Pinecrest
Condo. 982 So. 2d 1211, (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (holding that discovery in civil cases must
be relevant to the subject matter of the case and must be admissible or reasonably
calculated to lead to admissible evidence) Morton Plant Hospital Ass'n, Inc. v.
Shahbas, 960 So. 2d 820, 824 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (holding that "discovery should be
denied when it has been established that the information requested is neither relevant
to any pending claim or defense nor will it lead to the discovery of admissible evidence,"
citing Tanchel v. Shoemaker, 928 So. 2d 440, 442 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)).
13. As illustrated above, the questions are simply not germane to any pending
claim or defense nor will they lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Whether
Mr. Visoski believes or disbelieves the media accounts of this case, or whether Mr.
would leave his children with Mr. Epstein is not relevant and cannot
conceivably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
14. The Court should curtail these inappropriate lines of questions and enter a
protective order prohibiting them.
15. Rule 1.280(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, provides the Court with
EFTA02743374
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 15 of 26
LM v. Epstein
Case No. 5020D8CA028051XXXXMBAB
Epsteln's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions
Page 8 of 9
the power to "make any order to protect a party or person from annoyance,
embarrassment, oppression or undue burden or expense that justice requires including
... (4) that certain matter not be inquired into, or that the scope of the discovery be
limited to certain matters."
16. Accordingly, Epstein requests the Court enter a protective order
prohibiting Plaintiffs counsel from asking witnesses' questions regarding opinions and
beliefs regarding media articles and the allegations in this case and whether they would
leave their children with Epstein or questions of a similar nature, and limiting the scope
to the witnesses personal knowledge regarding matters relevant to the claims and
defenses in this case. See Shahbas, 960 So. 2d at 824.
WHEREFORE, Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, respectfully requests the Court
enter a protective order prohibiting Plaintiffs counsel from asking witnesses' questions
regarding opinions and beliefs regarding media articles and the allegations in this case
and whether they would leave their children with Epstein or questions of a similar
nature, and limiting the scope to the witnesses personal knowledge regarding matters
relevant to the claims and defenses in this case and grant any additional relief the Court
deems just and proper.
Certificate of Service
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was sent by fax and U.S.
Mail to the following addressees on this 3rd day of November, 2009:
Brad Esq.
Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler
401 East Las Olas Boulevard
Suite 1650
Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq.
Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 1400
EFTA02743375
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 16 of 26
1.M v. Epstein
Case No. 5O2008CA02805DOOOMBAB
Epstein's Motion for Protective Order to Prohibit Inappropriate Deposition Questions
Page 9 of 9
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
[Phone Redacted] Phone
[Phone Redacted] Fax
Counsel for Plaintiff
Jay Howell, Esq.
Jay Howell & Associates, P.A.
644 Cesery Boulevard
Suite 250
Jacksonville, FL 32211
[Phone Redacted] Phone
[Phone Redacted] Fax
Co-counsel for Plaintiff
West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012
Fax: [Phone Redacted]
Co-Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein
BURMAN, CRITTON, LUTTIER & COLEMAN, LLP
303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400
West Palm Be , FL 33401
(561) 842
(561) 84
By:
. Critton, Jr.
•-•`‘ F orida Bar #224162
Michael J. Pike
Florida Bar #617296
(Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Epstein)
EFTA02743376
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/O9/2OO9 Page 17 of 26
Larry Visoski October 15, 2009
IN TI€ CIRCUIT COVET OE 7HE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT.
:N AID NR Pa BEACH ccorny, FLOPIM
CASE KO. tnIECECA019051XXXX/0) AD
JEITKEY EPSTEIN.
Defendant.
Thdesday, Oetbb&s 15, 200f
10,11 - p...
$15 K. ragtag Drive
Suite P200
Nest ?Alm leach, Florida 2)401
Reported Sy: Roddy Wan l l, PM, CRR, RR
Ninety NOISCSUTEdt florid&
8444184 o•pontion Services
moot Palm leech ernes Job 5127542
3
2 INDEX
3 -
4
5 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS
6
LARRY VISOSKI
BY MR. NM 6
8 BY MR. CRITTON: 214
BY MR. NMI 223
9 BY MR. CRITTON 221
10
11
12 • - -
13 EXHIBITS
14 • - -
Is
16 NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE
11 PLAINTIFF'S EX. 1 FLIGHT LOG BOOK
(MARKED IN PREVIOUS DEPO)
18
19 PLAINTIFFS EC 2
PLAINTIFFS EX 3
20 PLAINTIFFS EX 4
PLAINTIFF'S EX 5
21
22
23
24
25
MESSAGE PAD 119
MESSAGE PAD 119
COMPLAINT 139
INMATE VISITOR LOG 161
1
2
3
5
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
APPEARANCES:
On he
J. ESQUIRE
IN, DT. ADLER
401 East Las Clas Boulevard
SS 1850
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394
On behalf of the Defendant:
ROBERT D. CRITTON, JR, ESQUIRE
BURMAN, CARTON a LUTTIER
303 Banyan Sallevard. Suite 403
West Palm Beach. fl odda 33401
On behalf of the Witness:
BRUCE REINHART, ESQUIRE
250 South Aust.fakan Avenue
Suite 1400
West Palm Bosch, Ronda 33401
ALSO PRES.
CARA L ESQUIRE
1220 N. . venue
Pembroke Pines, Florida 33028
ADAM D. HOROWITZ, ESQUIRE
MERMELSTEIN a HOROWITZ. PA.
18205 Biscayne Boulevard. Suite 2218
Florida 33180
RICHARD H. WILLITS, ESQUIRE (VIA TELEPHONE)
RICHARD H. WILLITS, PA.
2290 10th Avenue MN% Suite 404
Lake Worth, Florida 33461
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11.
12
13
19
15
16
1.7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
4
PROCEEDINGS
Deposition taken before Wendy Beath OMB
Certified RooThrne Reporter and Notary Public In and for
the State of Florida al Large, In the above cause.
MR. We're going to put something on
the record about— well, welt doh this way —
MR. REINHART: Do it at the end, after we get
him — whatever you want. It's your show.
MR. M..: Okay. There were — i don't
even tNnk kV. Waits Is aware of this. There was
a subpoena duces tecum for this witness. as welt as
the previous witness, which was another plot, Dave
Rogers, and that duces lecurn was to bring the
flight logs related from 1998 through 2005. What
was produced at the previous deposition were flight
bags from 2002 through 2005, and now Mr. Reinhart
has agreed to produce the remainder of the night
logs requested. those going from 1998 through 2002.
MR. REINHART: Correct. Theyre pilot logs,
not flight logs. There are other records we
Indicated are corporate records, and with those you
have to deal with Mr. CrIllon.
MR. CRITTON: However, with the proviso, too,
EFTA02743377
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 18 of 26
October 15, 2009
67
women?
MR. CRITTON: Form.
THE WITNESS: No.
BY MRIMM:
Q. You think that this is Just a story that a
6 bunch of underage women have made up?
7 •A. Speculation.
8 MR. CRITTON: Objection. Now its
9 argumentative. Who gives a dam what he thinks one
:0 way or another? f he has personal knowledge —
p MR : You're objecting to the form?
j2 MR. CRITTON: it's argumentative
13 MR=S: You're objecting to the form?
114 MR. CRITTON: Yes.
15 Mar: Okay.
.3.6 BY MR
17 O, Is that something that you believe that a
18 bunch of women — some of which know each other, some
19'. don't some of which have been on the airplane and some
20 which haven't — made this up. that Jeffrey Epstein
21 engaged in some sexual conduct with them?
22 MR. CRITTON: Form.
23 THE WITNESS: What I believe doesn't matter in
24 this case, does it?
25
66
1 Q. All right. When you read in the newspapers
2 the allegations that Mr. Epstein was involved with
3 numerous underage girls for sexual reasons, were you
4 surprised?
5 A. I didn't believe it.
6 O. Do you believe it today?
7 A. I don't believe it.
8 Q. You don't believe that Jeffrey Epstein was
9 involved with underage girls in a sexual way?
10 MR. CRITTON: Form.
11 THE WITNESS: You're asking for my opinion,
12 and I don't OK my opinion is relevant In that
13 matter.
14 BY MR.
15 Q. I think it's relevant Can you just tell me
16 whether today you believe that Jeffrey Epstein has
1? engaged in sex with underage girls?
18 MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation, Irrelevant.
19 always.
20 THE WITNESS: It's Irrelevant
21 BY MR.
22 Q. I need an answer.
23 A. I don't believe he had sex with underage
24 women.
25 O. Or engaged in any sexual acts with underage
68
1 BY
2 Q. I need an answer. Do you believe it? Do you
3 believe these girls made this up?
4 MR. CRITTON: Form.
5 MR. REINHART: I'm going to Instruct him not
6 to answer. Move on.
7 MR.-: Is there a privilege that we're
asserting?
9 MR. REINHART: No, It's irrelevant. It's
10 harassment and not likely to lead to discoverable
11 evidence.
12 Ma' . I'm going to-put on the record
13 right now that it is — we we allowed discovery
14 into a RICO count. We are also allowed discovery
15 Into the intent of Mr. Epstein In developing a
16 criminal enterprise designed to sexually exploit
17 and sexually abuse underage girls. We believe that
18 in doing so, he associated Intentionally with
19 people of similar beliefs that sex with underage
20 girls is okay, and that there have been many
21 discussions with this witness, as well as many
22 other witnesses with -- to Insure his protection
23 from law enforcement that they not answer these
24 specific questions. And thus, the opinions and
25 beliefs of all of these witnesses that we are
EFTA02743378
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 19 of 26
Larry Visoski October 15, 2009
69
1 alleging associated with this criminal enterprise
2 are certainly reasonably calculated to lead to the
3 discovery of admissible evidence. And If you're
4 still Instructing the witness, based on that
5 proffer, not to answer any of these questions, I'm
6 going to continue to ask the questions and you can
7 instruct him not to answer and we can go to the
a Court.
9 MR. REINHART: My response is to his opinion
10 whether people making allegations in this case are
11 colluding or making up a story is irrelevant to
12 what you just said. So i am going to instruct him
13 not to answer any question that goes to his opinion
14 of someone else's motivation or the truth of facts
15 to which he has no knowledge.
16 So yes, I'm instructing him not to answer,
17 MR. CRInON: Let me add in my pad, Is that I
18 think — you're certainly not oNy capable to ask
19 questions with regard to what his personal
20 knowledge is, and if he knows something or he has
21 reasonable basis for it; certainly you are entitled
22 to that information. I think yotNe asked those
23 questions and he's given you straightforward
24 answers as to what he knew or what he didn't know
25 under those circumstances. And as to what his
1
2
3
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
71
A. It's an opinion. and I believe that he has
not.
Q. Okay. Isn't It true that at some point In
time you learned that Jeffrey Epstein has — strike
that.
MR. CRITTON: When you &0rnately get to a
good place to break, will you let us knees'?
MR.-: Let's break now.
(A break was had at 11:28 a.m.)
BY MR. =M.
Q. Pg right. Eighteen years of being a pilot
for Jeffrey Epstein and In terms of being able to name
somebody that you‘sould say you've observed with Jeffrey
Epstein and woted classify that person as Jeffrey
Epstein's friend, can you name anybody?
A Nadia, Sarah; Just people that we see
routinely on the airplane.
O. Thats people you see routinely In the last
five to ten years, right?
A Yes.
Q. Prior to that time, anybody that you've
noticed as Jeffrey Epstein's friend may be Ghislaina
Maxwell?
A. What time frame?
O. Is that a person Nat at some point in time
70
1 thoughts are on something which he has no factual
2 basis or even an assumption to know one way or
3 another is Irrelevant. That's ultimately for a
4 fact-finder in this case
S While it's interesting, it's argumentative and
6 I don't think he's — I mean, do It on a
7 question-by-question basis. If he has knowledge,
8 that's great, but to argue your case with this
9 witness or any other witness doesn't serve a
10 purpose and I think is, you know — I think Ws
11 not a good use of our time, r6 put it that way.
12 But you know, you can go ahead and ask.
13 MR. I can ask the question and if
14 the witness is being instructed not to answer,
15 we'll let a judge decide whether he needs to answer
16 the question and whether it's discoverable or not.
17 MR. REINHART: Absolutely. Make your record.
18 BY MR.
19 O. Do you have any reason to believe that Jeffrey
20 Epstein engaged in sexual activity wilh underage women?
21 A. I have no reason to believe.
22 Q. Okay. So as you sit here today, based on your
23 18 years of knowledge, experience and observation of
24 Jeffrey Epstein, is 4 your belef that he has not had
25 sex or engaged in sexual activity villh underage women?
72
1 you woild classify as Jeffrey Epstein's friend?
2 A. I would classify it. I donl know If Ira
3 true.
4 O. But hats only because they were on the
5 airplane together?
6 A. Yes.
7 O. Do you know what Jeffrey Epstein does for a
Wing in your 18 years of observing and talking wth
9 Jeffrey Epstein?
10 A. No.
11 O. No idea?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Ever asked him?
14 A. No, actually.
15 O. Ever been curious?
16 A, Sure.
17 O. Ever:rione anything to satisfy that curiosity?
10 A. If you mean Googie It, not really, actually.
19 I mean. I really have not.
zo Q. Okay. So in 18 years of traveling and being
21 the plol and driving and taking this person, Jeffrey
22 Epstein, from one property In New York to New Mexico and
23 Florida and around the world, you have no idea what he
24 does in terms of how he makes money?
25 A. No, sir.
EFTA02743379
Case
g
9:09-cv-80
a
802-KAM Document lb Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 20 of 26
i t• '411 2.114 ya santest it Ei ting -axtesescattro DISCSTs
2
.3 t.
156
4 MR. GRIMM: Form.
5 THE WITNESS: No.
6 BY MR.
o Q. If you had been aware that Mr. Epstein was —
and by this — thIrs Is more In the form of a
9 hypothetical, and that I'm not going.to suggest to you
10 It's a fact that he was. But If you had been aware that
11 every single day Jeffrey Epstein's goal was to locate
12 underage girls (or the purposes of sex, and either have
13 sex with them on the airplane or at some other
1.1 designation that you were destination that you were
15 traveling him to, would you have continued to pilot
16 those planes?
AT MR. CRITTON: Form.
18 THE WITNESS: You said It was hypothetical?
19 BY MR.
20 Q. Right, pothellical,
21 A. Why would I want to answer that? Because
21 you're being hypothetical. I mean, It would obviously
;3 be wrong.
to Q. Sure. Well, a hypothetical question le a
IS legal question that I'm allowed to ask.
1
EFTA02743380
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSDDocket11/0912009 Page 21 of 26
A.•J-#
Larry Visoski
157
1 A. Okay.
2 Q. And I'm Just asking you if you did have
3 knovAedge that Jeffrey Epstein was having sex with
4 little gkls either on the plane or at a place that you
were taking him to or from on a daily basis, that's what
6 he did, would you have continued to be his phi? •
7 MR. CRITTON: Lel me object. Object to the
form. Ins argumentative. It has no more value
9 than assuming he was chopping up bodies or anybody
10 was chopping up bodies in the plane you're eyorig.
11 What difference does It make? Form,
12 MR. Me Met difference does II make In
13 a case about him having sex with little girls? I'm
14 not going to argue with you about it. You've
15 staled your objection.
16 MR. CRITTON: Exactly. It's an argumentative
17 question.
18 MR. MIR l90 not going to argue with you
19 about il.
20 MR. CRITTON: You're arguing with him about
21 now.
22 MR. No, I'm asking him the
23 hypothetical.
24 BY
25 Q. Can you answer that? Would you have continue'
158
1 to be a pilot for somebody who's traveling to and from
2 destinations with the goal of having sex with underage
3 girls?
MR. CRITTON: Fenn.
5 THE WITNESS: It could be any person. It
6 doesn't have to be Jeffrey Epstein, then, right?
7 BY PAR. Min
8 O. True.
9 A. No, I wouldn't pilot an airplane It there was
10 wrongdoing going on.
11 Q. That you knew about?
12 A. That I knew you about, sure.
13 Q. Me reading this complaint to you, is this the
14 first time you've heard these allegations —
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. — against Mr. Epstein?
17 A. Yes.
N.
EFTA02743381
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 22 of 26
Larry Visoski
181 ,
1 which he pled guilty le —
2 MR. CRITTON: Form.
3 MR. FtEINHART: Can we — for purposes of your
o hypothetical, what facia do you want him to assume
5 are true? You said the facts to which he pled
6 guilty, but the witness already said he doesn't
know what he pled guilty to. He knows the charge
8 he doesn't know the facts.
9 BY MR.
10 Q. Serrchallon of prostitution of a miner;
11 somebody under the age of 18.
12 MR. That's the charge, right,
13 sNIcitallon of prostitution of a minor?
11 MR. CRITTON: No. I think you've got It
15 wrong. Ill object to the form.
16 Mal Okay.
17 BY MR.
Is Q, Then we'll handle the question this war If
19 you were to believe based on information and evidence
20 that Mr. Epstein engaged in sex or some form of sex eel
21 with people of the age range of 12, 13, 14,15 years
22 old, would you continue your employment with
23 NV. Epstein?
24 MR. CRITTON: Form; speculation.
25 THE WITNESS'. I would certainty be speculating
182.
1 and I have to discuss it with my wife long and •
2 hard. I don't think I could give you a correct and
3 honest answer at this time.
4 BY MR.
5 O. OMthe allegations that have been
6 made in this case, Is this something that you have
7 disaissed with anyone other than your attorney?
a A. No, not really. Only from the fact that
9 they're allegations and there's slid a lot more work,
10 I'm sure, to be discovered.
11 MR. CRITTON: Let me put on there, for the--
12 if this deposition Is not typed — and we request
13 It — I'd like at least this portion where
14 Mr. last question back about five pages
15 Worth. SO Just if you could mark it from 21171
16 page back about five pages.
17 If nobody requests the deposakm, rd just
18 like those five pages.
19 MR. I'm going to request the
20 deposIllon, so...
21 MR. CRIME: Okay. We'll mark this then, so
22 you could tell me where it Is, approximately.
23 BY MR.
24 O. lai..aeon why you have not discussed
25 v4th Jeffrey Epstein the allegations that have been m.
EFTA02743382
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 23 of 26
Larry Eugene - Volume I October 6, 2009
1
IN TNT CIRCUIT COURT OF Mt
MD TOR PAIN BEACH
TOME 1 PPPPP
PleIntiff,
15211 NDICIAI. CIRCUIT IN
COUNTY, FLORIDA
1 tO 200
1
2
3
4
S
6
3
APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL
On bffiliit or the Defendent
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS
BY: JACK ALAN GOLDBERGER, ESO..
250 Australian Avenue
Sub 1400
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
[Phone Redacted]
isoldbergergesewpa.com
Con No. $02009CROMOS1 1
XxXXINI AD On beta of the Defendant by 101064140 4:
Mei CMIZIN,
Defendant.
X 9
BURMAN, CRITION, LUTTIER COLEMAN
BY: MICHAEL J. PIKE, ESQ..
515 N. Melia Drive
10 Sues 400
CCPOSITI Weal Palm Beech, FL 33401
LARRY IMICONt
TAKEO 01 rANALT DOSA1NTIIT
October 4, 2000
10:55 •.a. - 2:20 p.a.
11
12
[Phone Redacted]
inpkeebr.blaw.com
13
1)5 X. tlag1er Drive On WOW eA the wanes,:
Met eels Mach, IL 33403.4321 14
LAW OFFICE OF BRUCE E. REINHART
15 BY: BRUCE E. REINHART, ESO..
One Clearteke Cans
16 250 13. Auelfillen Avenue
:emit et 011otento, court zepor ter Sub 140D
17 Wait Par Beech. FL 33401
[Phone Redacted]
10 BRebharlafIroceREIniarlLaw cam
19
20
21
22
23
21
20
2 4
2
3
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
on Wei ef Yee Plea Lm.. Va l ADLER
1
2
INDEX OF EXAMINATION
4
aBAYd
• .
3 WITNESS:
LARRY EUGENE
401 East Las OM Booreard S Page
SOO POO
Pon LsorevOse. FL 33324 6 DIRECalialNATION
[Phone Redacted] Sy Mr. 4.5
Ire:=40w4041 7
*nom CROSS-EXAMINATION
On Wed of Ihelfdra Jwo Oce 2 0140u9h 0: a By Ms. Ezell 9190
9 CROSS-EXAMINATION
LIERMEtSTEIN a KAMM PA By Mr. Willits 9195
10 BY: JESSICA 0. ARBOUR. AITORNEYAT-LAW. 10
11
18205 BleCayne tIoulreard
SUM 2210 CROSS-EXAMINATION
LINK XL 33100 11 By Mr. Pike 0198
12 [Phone Redacted] 12 FUR REDIRECT EXAMINATION
)3
INDOISsenehuseallowary.00rn By Mr. 0199
14 On tea c4111•MIll Jena Doe 101 and 102 by 13
is 10340 000, 14
- -
16
POOPMISTCRSECX. PA
BY maw:we W. EZELL ATTORNEY.AT.LAYI• IS
25W. FlMter Steel 16 INDEX TO EXHIBITS
Mn FL $5130 1/
10
10
[Phone Redacted]
miellepaburstcon 18
Maingff a
Exhibit Description Page
20
On book& a* newarc.ma. ay 19 1 Twenty-four pages of *JEGE, Inc.,
Passenger Manifest: *138
21
LAW OFFICE Of RICHARD Mint PA
BY: RICHARD WILLITS, ESQ..
2290 tOM Avenue N.
20
21
32 sets 404 22
Lake Worn, PI 33441 23
33
24
[Phone Redacted]
heernmIllseactoxn 24 • (Plaintiffs Composite 1 was attached to the
original transcript anti copies of the transcript)
26 25
I' DEFENDANT'S * i - ;9011131T.
EFTA02743383
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 24 of 26
October 6, 2009
135
A. I have no idea. I don't know.
2 O. When you say Via was MI
3 combo In the icture vhat's your understanding as to
4 Is relative to Mr. Epstein?
5 A. I don't know. I don't understand. I
6 don't know. I cedn1 know If maybe she was like an
7 exchange — Jeffrey alleys aPPearedlo be very
8 Involved in education and philanthropy. I didn't
9 know If she was an exchange-type student or something
10 or anat. I don't know.
11 0. When you say he appeared to be Involved In,"
12 what do you mean?
13 A. Educational things, foundations, science
14 foundations, and things.
15 0. Speaking of - the Florida Science Foundation
16 Is a plot:eviler., vAken he was on work release, he spent a
17 lot of lime there, you're aware of that?
A. That's what Na heard, yeah.
19‘. 0. what does Mat place do?
20 A. Mune no idea.
21 O. Does it do anything?
22 A I don't know. I don't know anything about
23 It.
24 O. Certainly you've read certain newspaper
25 articles about the allegations. police reports,
136
1 otherwise, the allegations that occurred or haw been
2 alleged to have occurred at his Palm Beach mansion,
3 correct?
4 A. Uh-huh.
5 0. Correct?
6 A. Correct.
7 0. Given the nature of those allegations, would
B you leave your daughter of 11, 15, 15 years old with Mr.
9 Epstein alone?
.10 MR. PIKE: Form. Maw to strike.
11 A Yes,
12 O. You would?
13 A. (Winne nods head.)
14 O. And why?
3s A. Because I don't fear that he would try
16 anything with my daughter. He showed — When I
17 worked for him he showed me respect. He never — I
• 18 never— He never showed me disrespect. He would ask
19 how the family is. I mean, not on a personal level,
20 but an employerlemployee.
21 0. Right. Okay.
22 A He never showed me any reason not to trust
23 him.
24 0. But you're not a 13-year old girl, so.
25 A. No, but, like I say, he never showed me
EFTA02743384
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 25 of 26
October 6, 2009
175 4
1 Q. And despite pleading guilty to procuring
2 underage Volt for the purposes of sex, you el& feel
3 comfortable leaving a 13, 14,15 -year-old fl u around
4 him?
5 MR. PIKE Fort Move to suite.
6 A. Yes. I mean, hith my daughter, yes. I
7 don't know how he behaves around anybody else. I
8 just know that the respect that he showed me, l feel
9 safe with my daughter.
10 0. And have you read in detail the reports as to
11 what happened at his house with the girls?
12 A Only —
13 MR. PIKE: Form.
14 A. — what's been in the newspapers and
15 published.
16 Q. If you read and hear testimony given - well, I
17 can tell you now-testimony has been given In this case
19., that what happens is: A 13 or 14 year okJ Is led
19 upstairs by homed, told to get naked, he lays down on
20 his back, thee is a brief massage before he turns over,
21 exposes himself erect, masturbates while he tells this 13
22 or 14 year old to pinch his nipples as hard as she can
23 while he inserts his fingers into their vagina and
24 e)aculates al over them before saying, 'Take your money
25 and leave."
176
1 MR. PIKE: Form. Move to strike.
2 BY
3 Q. Okay? Then, 'You can continue to come back
4 (or $200 every time or every girl you bring me within
5 your age group and I get to do this again, I pay you $200
6 per person' if that is the testimony —
7 MR. PIKE Form.
Q. — that what happens behind closed doors with
9 Mm, do you still feel coMforlable leaving a 13 or 14
10 year old in a room with Jeffrey Epstein?
11 MR. PIKE: Form.
12 A. If that, in feet, Is what actually
13 happened, no.
EFTA02743385
Case 9:09-cv-80802-KAM Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2009 Page 26 of 26
184
1 you witnessed Jeffrey Epstein committing?
2 A No.
3 Q. Would you -
4 A. No.
5 O. go back - considering what you've read and
6 what you may or may not believe- would you go bad( to
7 working for Jeffrey Epstein?
8 MR. PIKE: Form.
9 A. I cant say. I still work for him on a
10 maintenance -to maintain the airplanes and stuff
11 Aka Thal, so.
12 Q. You're on his payroll?
13 A. Salaried, yes.
la 0. Do you know who else is on his payroll?
15 A. Well, Dave and Larry.
16 Q. Certainty. if I want to know more about his
17 private life - do you know who's at his house?
18 A. No.
19 0. Do you know who his housekeeper Is?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Do you know who his architect is?
22 A No, no.
23 0. Does Larry visit him at his house?
2 4 A. I would assume so.
25 Q. Why do you say you would assume so? •Thal
EFTA02743386