Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-134House OversightCorrespondence

Theodore J. Leopold writes to Jack A. Goldberger expressing concern about the ethics of Goldberger's...

Theodore J. Leopold writes to Jack A. Goldberger expressing concern about the ethics of Goldberger's co-counsel regarding the handling of exhibits during a direct examination, and confirms an agreement to provide copies of the exhibits to the State Attorney and Leopold.

Date
Unknown
Source
House Oversight
Reference
d-134
Pages
1
Persons
2
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Theodore J. Leopold writes to Jack A. Goldberger expressing concern about the ethics of Goldberger's co-counsel regarding the handling of exhibits during a direct examination, and confirms an agreement to provide copies of the exhibits to the State Attorney and Leopold.

Tags

dispute over exhibits used in direct examinationconcerns about co-counsel's ethicsagreement to provide copies of exhibits
0Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02729648

53p
Dept. of JusticeDepositionUnknown

Subpoena for Deposition: DOJ-OGR-00031546

A subpoena was issued on February 5, 2008, requiring an individual to appear for a deposition on February 20, 2008, in the case of State of Florida vs. Jeffrey Epstein. The subpoena was issued by attorney Jack A. Goldberger and directed to an individual represented by Theodore J. Leopold.

1p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02728716

1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 1 of 100 nsor & Associates RepornnE sad Transcripoon. Inc 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 Page 75 Q. Because Mr. Epstein never came to your dad's house, correct? A. Correct. Q. And no one who worked for Mr. Epstein ever did something to your dad's tires, did they? MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Lack of foundation, predicate. Don't guess. BY MR. TEIN: Q. It's not true that Mr. Epstein almost killed your father, is it? MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and answered, lack of foundation, predicate. BY MR. TEIN: Q. You can answer. A. No. Q. Now you told the police that you didn't know who was in the car with you and IIIIIII on the day you went to Epstein's house, didn't you? A. Yes. Q. And that was a lie, wasn't it? A. It's the truth. Q. You told the police that there was someone in the car next to you and you specifically said y

100p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Crw4.-ta. \-2 •

17p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 14 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/22/2008 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-80804-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE, a/k/a JANE DOE #1, Plaintiff, VS. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. EPSTEIN'S RESPONSE TO MOTION TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE [DE 121 Defendant Jeffrey Epstein hereby responds to the plaintiff Jane Doe's motion to preserve evidence, as follows: I. The Certificate of Compliance annexed to the plaintiffs motion states that plaintiff's "counsel conferred with counsel for [Mr. Epstein] . . . and [Epstein's] counsel advised that [Epstein] opposelS] this motion." DE 12 at 2 (emphasis added). That certification is inaccurate. 2. On August 21, 2008, counsel for the plaintiff called Kathryn Meyers, Esq. of the Lewis Tein law firm to elicit Epstein's position on this motion. Ms. Meyers responded that she would confer with Mr. Tein and call them back. Less than thirty minutes later, however, plain

4p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.