10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 he will do it, but that's where this battle need to be fought. As a matter of comity, your Honor, this Court should defer to Judge Marra because, A, he has already ruled on the disclosure of the nonpros agreement, but even more importantly, the supremacy clause requires you to defer to the federal laws of criminal procedure that Say these ‘ matters should be protected and should not be disclosed unless the district court says so. If the Court is going to go on and wants to go to the issues that would be contained if it were not dealing with a grand jury proceeding, obviously there's a test that the Court must then use under the Rules of Judicial Administration and it says matters can be sealed but they should be sealed if there's a compelling government interest or if the sealing is important to the administration of justice. There's a couple other criteria, but the ones obviously that woulda apply in this case are the compelling government SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180863

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 interest, and the importance to the administration of justice, Again, we are dealing with a secret grand jury matter. We cannot circumvent that secrecy by asking the Court to invoke its unsealing power. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. GOLDBERGER: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Let me go over to the other parties and we'll get back to Mr. Goldberger and his client. Post, who wants to go first? MS. SHULLMAN: Mr. Edwards. THE COURT: Mr. Edwards, MR. EDWARDS: Your Honor, inasmuch as Mr. Epstein is relying on Judge Marra's order to support the argument that the nonprosecution agreement needs to remain sealed, I'd like to address that if you are inclined to be persuaded by that argument at all. The orders that have now been moved into evidence are in case No. 80736, and just to put that order in context in SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180864 21

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 22 actuality, the order says -- specifically puts it back on this Court and confers authority on this Court over this Particular document, when in the second page of the February 12th, 2009 order, it's misdated 2009 but it's a 2009 order, and the last two sentences read: If and when petitioners have a specific tangible need to be relieved of the restrictions, they should file an appropriate motion, which we believe we have done in this case, if a specific tangle need arises in the civil cases, which are in circuit court in Palm Beach County, then relief should be sought there and notice to all parties, so to give the Court context for that order, there was a state court plea taken June 30th, 2008, where Mr. Epstein pled guilty to the state court cases as it related to two victims. Now, parallel to that, there was an investigation in federal court where the United States attorney's office and the FBI had more than 30 victims of sex abuse of Mr. Epstein's and they were working with these girls and their cases. Now, several SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180865

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 23 of those girls came to me and said, hey, we're worried that there's a secret deal going on between Epstein and the U.S. attorney's office, so I filed an emergency petition against the U.s. attorney's office asking the federal court to intervene and get in the middle of this and not let this deal go forward without meaningfully conferring with these girls because I was alleging it violated the crimes Victim's Rights Act; these girls have a right to be heard. That emergency motion was filed July 7th, 2008, and I have that for the Court, and I'd like to enter that into evidence as well. THE COURT: We'll mark that as EW's Exhibit No. 1, MR. EDWARDS: And an emergency hearing was held four days later in front of Judge Marra, who was randomly assigned to this case at the time the plea was taken and the prosecution agreement was sealed. Judge Marra had nothing to do with the agreement,: with Epstein, he didn't know anything about it. SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180866

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 So four days later now we're in front of him and the United States attorney's office says for the first time, sorry, girls, you are too late, the deal has already been done as to all of your federal cases and it resulted in the nonprosecution agreement that is attached in the state court case. Judge Marra turned to us and said, what is your remedy. At that point in time I said we don't know because we don't know what protections are inside that agreement, so we want you to unseal it, that's where the motion for protective order came about where he gave us the agreement so we can look at it and determine what remedy, if any, was available. Once we had that agreement under the caveat that we were not able to disseminate to third parties and reviewed it and saw there is very little protection for the girls, we asked to unseal it completely, so that we can talk to third parties, to victim's rights groups and get some insight as to what our possible remedy would be. SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180867

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 And so our reason for wanting him to unseal it at that time was we want to be able to talk to other people, and that's where this order from February 12th, 2009, came in, and he denied that motion to unseal it for three reasons. First and foremost, this nonprosecution agreement was not sealed in my Court, you are talking to the wrong judge, you need to go back, so we're getting the back and forth here and it's not in my court, I can't mess with some other judge's order. Obviously, there was a hearing held and that document was sealed for a reason, I'm not privy for those reasons, so I'm not going to override whatever that judge was thinking when they sealed that document. Second, your reason is you just want to talk to other people about them, and if I'm going to override some other judge's order, I need to have a more compelling reason than you just want to talk to people about, Third, if and when a specific need SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180868

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 arises in any of the civil cases, which by the time this order was coming about they were stacking up in state and federal court against Mr. Epstein, petition that court, petition the appropriate court, and he implies that appropriate court is this court where it was initially sealed, which we've done in this case. This court has none of the problems that Judge Marra had in that it was sealed in this courtroom. we have noticed Mr. Epstein to be heard at this hearing, which is one of the requirements that Judge Marra placed on us, and a specific need has arisen. It has been sealed for over a year now, correct, Mr. Goldberger is correct, but the specific need is arising because we are in the middle of discovery. And this document is, as mr. Goldberger said, a great inducement to Mr. Epstein Pleaing guilty to sex crimes in state court, and to ultimately being labeled a sex offender, and the only document that pertains to my clients, my client as a victim of Mr. Epstein's sex crime, so at SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180869

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 the very least, we should be allowed to ask people in deposition and do discovery about how this document came about. There is a need here. THE COURT: I don't quite get -- I don't think it's relevant to what my task is here, but I don't get how it's relevant in the civil cases what the federal government did or didn't do with regard to prosecuting Mr. Epstein. I don't get that, but I don't know that I need to. MR. EDWARDS: The standard for discovery is just reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence and without going in depth we do have intention -- MR. GERBER: Your Honor, can I -- MR. EDWARDS: And with respect to the grand jury argument, you've seen the document, it's only page five and six that it's even referred to. THE COURT: All right. Let me turn it over to -- does the Post want to speak? MS. SHULLMAN: I do, but I think he wants to go first so whenever. SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180870

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 THE COURT: I haven't considered your motion to intervene yet. MR. KUVIN: I don't believe it was an objection. When it was filed, there was no objection by mr. Goldberger or Mr. Critton, THE COURT: Are you going to advocate by motion to intervene or are you going to be jumping into the merits of the sealing? MR. KUVIN: I'1ll jump right into the merits, I'm not going to duplicate anything that was just raised or anything that the press is going to raise, I have an individual interest. THE COURT: All right. Go ahead Mr. Kuvin. MR. KUVIN: Very briefly, your Honor. I represent BB who has filed only a state court action, she is not under the federal jurisdiction of Judge Marra, she does not subject herself to the federal jurisdiction of Judge Marra, she was never Provided an opportunity to brief any issues before Judge Marra with respect to that order that was entered by Judge Marra or either order. In addition, what's also very important is SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180871

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 29 she has never seen this document, so she does not know what is in the contents of the order, so the issue igs raised by Mr. Goldberger about the girls are able to see the document and evaluate how they might need to evaluate this document does | not apply to my client because she has never seen it and, frankly, without subjecting herself voluntarily to the jurisdiction of Judge Marra, which she chooses not to do, then she cannot get this document, otherwise she would have to go to federal court, submit herself to the jurisdiction of the federal court to then see a state court document, which does not Make any sense because if it is a state court document in state court, as | previously stated under Judge Marra's order, it is within your purview and your jurisdiction to rule ona state court document. Finally, with respect to why the document may be relevant, the contents of that document speak to the issues of whether or not Mr. Epstein can or cannot SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180872

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 “14 15 16 17 18 | 19 20 | 21 | 22 23 | 24 [- 25 30 assert his fifth amendment right against self incrimination, and we believe ona | good faith believe that on the contents of | that document speak to the issues of whether or not he can or cannot deny the claims that have been brought against him both in state and federal court. In other words, whether or not he must, in fact, admit that he molested these 14 year old girls, so, therefore, the content of that document is paramount as to the issues in the civil proceedings that are currently pending in state court which is why we would like that document, THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Thank you so very much. Ms. Shullman from the Post. MS. SHULLMAN: Thank you, your Honor. I feel a little bit like I have stepped into the twilight zone here, so I'd like to address a couple of the things we've addressed and get us to what we are really here to do today. THE COURT: I don't know if you are referring specifically to the courtroom or SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180873

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 31 the convoluted situation that brings us to the courtroom. MS. SHULLMAN: Just this whole federal state situation. There is no hill for the public and the press to march up in Judge Marra's court as Mr. Edwards pointed out, Judge Marra has specifically held the agreement was not filed in this case under seal or otherwise, so were I to march into Judge Marra's courtroom and do my whole public access spiel, he woulda Say take it to you, your Honor, because it's nota record in my court. It isa record here, and in the state court as we talked about the last time, we were here, there's a presumption of openness. The burden is on Mr. Epstein to overcome that presumption. While he filed a very brief memorandum after our last hearing, which identified for interest, he has by no means met the test of either establishing those interest or establishing the remainder of that test which would be that closures no broader than necessary ineffective no other reasonable alternatives, so if I could, I'd SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180874

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2s 32 like to sort of focus us back to the inquiry we're here to make today in this court, and that is whether your Honor is going to provide public access to two records that are, I think, indisputably in your Honor's court file in this court's file. It's a plea agreement and an addendum; those are historically and typically open records. Mr. Goldberger mentioned that the plea agreement was sort of incidentally filed in this court file, and that it was sort of an afterthought that happened. He never came into court intending that it even be part of the court file, but Judge Pucillo specifically said, this is a significant inducement to accepting the plea in my court. This agreement that you have with federal prosecutors is significantly the reason why you're entering this plea before me. And she took those records into the court file presumably because they are significant to this litigation. Even if there was an SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180875

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 33 incidental filing, which cannot possibly be the case here, there is no mechanism in Florida law to call a Mulligan and to pull it out of the court file. As you know, the Floridians have a constitutional right of access, there's no mechanism in that law to just say, oopsy, let's take it out of the file, so they have to meet their burden and they have to show under Rule 2.420 that one of those interests is satisfied. They have identified four here. I have not heard them discuss them at any great length. But I will go through them quickly. The imminent threat to the fair, impartial orderly administration of justice, or to protect a compelling government interest. As your Honor is aware, the federal government is not here today. I have spoken with the state attorney's office who has indicated that their only interest is in Protecting to the extent necessary because I've not seen these documents the identity of the victims of these crimes. The Post in its motion to intervene SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180876

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 34 has already set forth that we have no objection to redacting the victim's names if, in fact, that is required because we haven't seen the agreement. To avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties, again, absolutely no showing on that test. I have no burden at this point, but I will simply state that the law in Florida is clear that mr. Epstein doesn't have standing to assert that interest. And, finally, something else I heard nothing about to avoid substantial injury to a party which, I guess, presumably would be Mr. Epstein by disclosure of matters protected by a privacy right not generally inherent in this specific type of proceedings. Again, I have not heard any attempt to meet the burden on that issue, however, Florida law is equally clear that participants in crimes lose their privacy interest in the matters and facts and circumstances of the commission of those crimes, so Mr. Epstein surely cannot establish that there is a separate privacy interest not inherent in a criminal SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180877

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 35 prosecution regarding the molestation of young girls. The circumstances under which closure is allowed in Florida are exceedingly narrow. We first -- and before we do anything else -- have to find that one of those interests is met here, that it exists and that the movant has met its burden in demonstrating that it's significant enough to require the court to consider closure, That's not the end of inquiry. And, of course, I have not yet heard anything else about that second half of the test which talks about the idea that closure is no broader than necessary to protect that interest and that it would be effective and that there are no other alternatives. In speaking of the federal litigation there are instances when both Mr. Epstein's lawyers and the federal prosecutors have placed portions of the agreement into the public court file. There are -- thus attempts to seal those records in the federal litigation have been unsuccessful, so part of this agreement the cat is SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180878

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 36 already out of the bag. But there is also an enormous public interest in what's going on here, apart from the idea that this man is accused of having many, many victims who were all young children which, of course, in itself creates a lot of public concern, the chief of police at the time sent a letter to the state Prosecutors and said, | what are you guys doing, how are you handling this, this is highly unusual; 1 don't like what I'm seeing here. And even went so far as to say, state attorney's office, should you all step away from this case. So we have public interest from the perspective of the police chief questioning the state attorney's office about whether it's doing its job. We have public interest that's Spurned by the idea that some of the victims in the federal prosecution -- in the federal court claimed they weren't aware of it, we just heard Mr. Edwards talk about the fact that his clients weren't aware of the agreement unless it all went down, so we have a SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180879

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 37 significant public interest about how everybody in this litigation is doing their job. There is nothing more fundamentally important than the ability of the public and the press to observe how its government, all branches of its government, do its job. There are multiple, as Mr. Edwards also mentioned, multiple civil lawsuits that have spurned as a result of Mr. Epstein's conduct, and, again, the public has an interest in what's going on in civil litigation matters. In short, this matter involves a major public interest from a lot of different levels. There is no basis for closure that has been asserted here. It's a heavy burden to meet. We start with the idea that openness is the right thing to do but there is essentially no purpose served at this point by keeping these agreements sealed in this case. Unless your Honor has any questions, I think that's it. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you so very SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180880

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 ‘ 13 | 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 23 24 bia 25 38 much. Ms. Burns, on behalf of the state of Florida, anything you'd like to add or advocate? MS. BURNS: If I may, your Honor. THE COURT: Sure. MS. BURNS: Good afternoon, your Honor. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MS. BURNS: Your Honor, the State is not here to take a position on whether or not this court should seal -- continue to seal the records or unseal the records. We are here merely to uphold the state laws which require all of us as members of the judicial system to protect the rights of the confidentiality of the victims. I do see two issues here, your Honor, One is if you decide to unseal the records based upon the arguments that have been presented to you, then the State would ask that the court first do an incamera viewing, not just merely open up that portion of the file for viewing by all interested parties, first, that the Court do an incamera viewing to make two SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180881

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 39 evaluations. Number one, does the document, in fact, have a relationship to the criminal Case in the state matter. And, number two, evaluate the right of public access versus the victim's right to confidentiality. If this Court does decide to unseal those records, then the State would ask that this Court before making the document public access, then make certain that in Place is that the victim's identities are amended to initials if their names are used. The State does have a concern regarding the argument of the Federal Rule Six in that is this Court bound by a federal rule which perhaps has been made unenforcible by virtue of making it a part of the state file, so I think the Court also would need to address that issue before making its ruling. THE COURT: All right, great. Thank you so much, MS. BURNS: Thank you, Judge, THE COURT: One last chance for the federal government, they're not here and SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180882

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 40 I'll let rebuttal of any other presentation, Mr. Goldberger, or, Mr. Critton, you'd like to make. MR. GOLDBERGER: Thank you, your Honor. As to the last argument made by Ms. Burns as to the applicability of Federal Rule 6 of the Rules of Federal Criminal Procedure it's something that we learned in the law school that the Supremacy clause controls and to the extent there's a conflict between the federal doctrine and the state doctrine, the Supremacy clause requires the federal rule of law to apply and to control. And certainly in this case you cannot use a state procedure to circumvent a federal rule of criminal procedure that confers secrecy to a grand jury proceeding. And the Palm Beach Post response to the argument never made note of the grand jury rule, they simply avoided that issue and that in our mind is equally important as the fact in the interest of comity this Court should defer to the rulings of Judge Marra already. SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180883

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 41 As to Mr. Kuvin's argument that he has a client that is in state court and is not in federal court and therefore he doesn't have a remedy in federal court. With all due respect to mr. Kuvin, that's similarly wrong. Judge Marra's order specifically dealt with a class of individuals who were identified as victims of Mr. Epstein's conduct, and Judge Marra's order says that anyone who's been identified by the United States attorney's office as a victim has right to the nonprosecution agreement under the same rules, Just so the Court understands, I know we are talking like the Court understands everything about this case. There was a list of victims that was created at the time that the nonprosecution agreement was entered into and Mr. Kuvin's client is on that list. That list was created by the U.S. attorney's office. He has the same rights to the nonprosecution agreement as if he filed this case in federal court and he knows that we've told him that he has SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180884

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 42 that access, As to the fact that the nonprosecution agreement is presumably not filed in the federal case in our last hearing in front of Judge Marra on June Sth -- I'm sorry, June 12th, Mr. Edwards advised Judge Marra that he had, in fact, filed a nonprosecution agreement to no one's surprise under seal in the federal file, so the nonprosecution agreement according to Mr. Edwards' declaration at that hearing is contained in the federal court system. For all of those reasons, your Honor, and the reasons that I previously indicated to the Court, we would ask the Court to defer to the federal court in this matter. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you very much. Here is what I'm Planning on doing, so you know where I'm going on this. I'l] make an oral announcement and I'll follow it up with a written order so that you all can have something to take to wherever you want to take it. I find that the appropriate procedure SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180885

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 43 to seal or close these documents has not been met, so I'll deny the motion to seal the documents. I'll grant the motion to unseal them. I will take a look at the documents. I will redact out of them the -- what I'll do is, I'll leave the originals intact sealed in the court file to protect the names of any underage victims. I will make copies of those. I'll redact out the names leaving -- expose the initials of any of the individuals. I'11 get that done -- I'll get my written order out granting and denying the respective motions hopefully by the end of today. If not today, tomorrow. I plan on releasing the redacted versions probably Monday, so that those will be available for public consumption on Monday. MR. GOLDBERGER: Your Honor, thank you. Thank you for the oral pronouncement. Your Honor, based on the Court's ruling, we do have a motion to stay disclosure of the nonprosecution agreement. The rules of appellate procedure require us to file that SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180886

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 44 before, your Honor. Your Honor, we do intend to take certiorari on this to the Fourth District Court. THE COURT: That's why I figure between the written rule and the disclosure give you a chance to catch your breath and do that. I guess you might want that. Is Monday 5 p.m. enough time for you to get over to the DCA? MR. GOLDBERGER: Actually, your Honor, the Rule of Appellate Procedure maintains jurisdiction with you on this matter to entertain the motion to stay. THE COURT: So I need to handle the motion to stay? MR. GOLDBERGER: Correct, your Honor. THE COURT: Do you want to argue that now? Do you want to take a look at that, catch your breath, come back and see me Monday sometime; what's your pleasure? MR. GOLDBERGER: We're ready to do it now, your Honor, We're ready to do it now. THE COURT: All right. Interveners, your thoughts. SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180887

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 | 23 24 | ' 25 45 MR. KUVIN: Matter of procedure point, I just want to make sure that the motion to intervene is, in fact, granted, THE COURT: You're BB's motion to intervene is granted. Do you have a written order for me to sign off on there? MR. KUVIN: I can submit that. THE COURT: Why don't you catch your breath and come back tomorrow and I'll hear argument. It will give me a chance to read the motion, check out the rules, take a look, got to get myself gassed up. Anybody want. to drop anything off for me to read before the hearing, please do that. Why don't we do that tomorrow morning, and why don't we reconvene here tomorrow at 1:30 on the motion to stay. MR. GOLDBERGER: That's fine. THE COURT: How does your schedule look? MR. GERBER: Your Honor, is it possible to have it a little later, perhaps an hour later tomorrow? THE COURT: 2:30. MR. GERBER: If possible. SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180888

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 46 THE COURT: How about a little later than that still, let me take a look at our official calendaring System here. MR. CRITTON: Judge Colbath, I'm gone tomorrow, I'm going to Gainesville at one or 12:30-ish. I told my wife I would be home at one. My daughter's birthday, 21, she's having a party, I plan to be there. Can we do it tomorrow morning any time, it would be great, THE COURT: Tomorrow morning is ugly. This isn't going to take long. MS. BURNS: This is a five-minute motion. THE COURT: Why don't we do this, meet at 8:15? MS. SHULLMAN: Your Honor, I'm not going to be able to get my kids to school if I have to be here at 8:15. My husband is in California right now. MR. GOLDBERGER: I don't mean to jump in. I wonder if we can do some of this telephonically. MS. SHULLMAN: Yes, I can appear by phone or I can have one of my partners. SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180889

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 47 THE COURT: In the morning what would be a good start time for you? MS. SHULLMAN: Nine would be getter, I can't drop them off before eight. THE COURT: It's going to be brief argument, let's do it 9:00 tomorrow morning; 9:00 work for you? MR. CRITTON: Yes, sir. Thank you. MR. GOLDBERGER: Just very briefly, the Court is going to look at the nonprosecution agreement and do some redacting, I believe. I just need to advise the court in addition to mr. Epstein and perhaps victims mention the nonprosecution agreement,. there are third parties who the Court needs to look about redacting their names also, and that's contained in the nonprosecution agreement. In other words, there are other people beside Mr. Epstein and Mr. Victims whose names are mentioned in the nonprosecution agreement, and I would ask the Court to look at those names also for the purpose of redacting. THE COURT: I'll like a look. SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180890

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 48 MR. EDWARDS: Your Honor, those are not names of victims, those are co-conspirators as listed in the agreement and we would object to any redaction of those names. I don't think there's any standing to ask for that. THE COURT: I'll take a look. All right. See you all tomorrow morning at nine. If you want to send anything to me later this afternoon or tomorrow morning before we take the bench, I'm happy to receive it. Have a good afternoon. (Proceedings concluded.) SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180891

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 49 CERTIFICATE THE STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PALM BEACH. I, SUSAN s. WIGGINS, R.P.R. Official Court Reporter for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Criminal Division, in and for Palm Beach County, Florida; do hereby certify that I was authorized to and did report the foregoing proceedings before the Court at the time and place aforesaid; and that the preceding pages numbered from 1 to 48, inclusive, represent a true and accurate transcription of my steno notes taken at said proceedings. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my official signature this 29th day of June, 2009. Buaan QB IK) SUSAN S. WIGGINS, SUSAN WIGGINS, R.P.R. AND OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180892

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

666-9856 TIVD HIGUOTN OL WadVd GHTOADTA AWOd1 as EFTA00180893

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT | IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA | CRIMINAL DIVISION STATE OF FLORIDA vs. CASE No. 2008CF009381AXx ) ) ) ; ) JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ) ) ) Defendant. Defendant. CERTIFIED COPY PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT PRESIDING: HONORABLE JEFFREY COLBATH APPEARANCES: ON BEHALF OF THE STATE: BARRY E. KRISCHER, ESQUIRE State Attorney 401 North Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 By: BARBARA BURNS, ESQUIRE Assistant State Attorney ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT: JACK GOLDBERGER, ESQUIRE 250 S Australian Ave Ste 1400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 And ROBERT CRITTON, ESQUIRE 515 N Flagler Dr Ste 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 ON BEHALF OF THE PALM BEACH POST: DEANNA SHULLMAN, ESQUIRE Thomas, LoCicero & Bralow 101 N.E. 3rd Avenue - Ste 1500 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 ON BEHALF OF EW, THE INTERVENER: WILLIAM J. BERGER, ESQUIRE BRAD EDWARDS, ESQUIRE 225 NE Mizner Blvd Ste 675 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180894

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ON BEHALF OF EB, MOTION INTERVENER’S PLEADING: SPENCER KUVIN, ESQUIRE 2925 PGA Blvd Ste 200 Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 dune 26, 2009 Palm Beach County Courthouse West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Beginning at 9:59 o'clock, a.m. SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180895

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 BE IT REMEMBERED that the following proceedings were had in the above-entitled cause before the HONORABLE JEFFREY COLBATH, one of the judges of the aforesaid court, at the Palm Beach County Courthouse, located in the City of West Palm Beach, State of Florida, on June 26, 2009, beginning at 9:59 o’clock, a.m., with appearances as hereinbefore noted, to wit: THEREUPON: THE COURT: Epstein. MR. GOLDBERGER: Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: Let me call up the State of Florida versus Epstein. Let’s have everyone announce their appearance, please, name on the record. MR. CRITTON: Robert Critton and Jack Goldberger on behalf of Mr. Epstein as well as Barbara Compiani from the office of Jane Walsh. MS. SHULLMAN: Deanna Shullman of Thomas, LoCicero and Bralow on behalf of the Palm Beach Post. MR. KUVIN: Spencer Kuvin on behalf of the intervener BB. MS. BURNS: Barbara Burns on behalf SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180896

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of the State of Florida. THE COURT: That’s it. MR. CRITTON: That’s it, it’s a wrap. THE COURT: Okay. Orders. Who's not here that I have to mail it to? MR. GOLDBERGER: Mr. Edwards is not here, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Berger, Mr. Edwards. Did I give you enough copies of the order? MR. GOLDBERGER: I ran out. I have just enough. Do you want me to get a copy to Mr. Edwards? THE COURT: Yes, if you'd mail a copy to Mr. Edwards. I got spares if anybody’s interested. Anybody need a spare? MR. GOLDBERGER: We’re good, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Motion to Stay, Mr. Goldberger. MR. GOLDBERGER: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: Mr. Critton. MR. CRITTON: Good morning, Judge Colbath, do you have a copy of our Motion SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180897

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to Stay? THE COURT: I do, the one that was handed up to me yesterday? MR. CRITTON: Yes, sir, and I have a proposed order in the event the Court chooses to grant; may I provide that to the Court as well? Your Honor, as you know, Mr. Goldberger and I represent Mr. Epstein. We have hired Ms. Walsh and Ms. Compiani as appellate counsel to assist in the filing of a writ of certiorari. I know that comes as no surprise to the Court in that whoever prevailed and lost yesterday, I think the Court recognized we probably filed a writ of certiorari. THE COURT: Let me ask real quick. Anybody objecting to the defendant having the ability to have my decision reviewed by the appellate court before I release these things? I mean, it seems pretty straight forward. MS. SHULLMAN: We have an objection, your Honor, to some extent. The -- you know, the procedure in place here is very SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180898

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 similar to that for which they would have to obtain a preliminary injunction. THE COURT: Right. MS. SHULLMAN: So to demonstrate likelihood of success and irreparable harm, I don’t think they can do that. I think the plan that you put in -- proposed yesterday is a good one, that is you redact and you release on Monday and that gives them today and Monday to get to the Fourth, otherwise, we’re stuck in a position where we have a 30-day window to appeal, and we are all delay, delay, delay. THE COURT: What if I do that? I don’t know if it’s a difference with that or distinction, but, procedurally, I was thinking I was leaning yesterday towards issuing the order that I just issued. I think that that’s a fairly accurate rendition of the written version of my oral pronouncement yesterday, but I order that nothing -- that the redacted orders not be released until -- I’1l make it, you know, five of five Monday. That will give you Monday to get down to the Fourth to get SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180899

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 them to stop this from being released; what do you think? MR. CRITTON: Here’s what the problem is, Judge, is Ms. Compiani and Ms. Walsh spoke to them yesterday and today, we need a transcript from the hearing yesterday which has not yet been obtained. They need the underlying motions, they need some time to research. It’s not a matter of simply filing a writ of petition and that stays the release of the order. There would have to be a separate motion that would be filed with the Appellate Court. The Motion to Stay that we file under Appellate Rule 9.310, subsection A, it provides that the party that seeks review shall come to the lower tribal, which is the trial court, which is you, in this instance, and then it’s within your discretion either to stay or not to stay under the circumstances, and we simply don’t have the time within which to file the appeal under those circumstances. There are two criteria that have to be met here, one is the likelihood of SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180900

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 harm where no stay is granted, and the second criteria, not necessary mutually exclusive; that is, you don’t have to have both of them, but you certainly have to give an indicia of both of them. The second one is the likelihood of success on the merits. We believe that based upon the Court decision, respectfully, that the Court, that the Appellate Court, will quash your order, for the reasons Judge Puccillo was the one who requested that the document in this -- this was argued yesterday, so I’m going to be very brief. She is the one who requested post sentencing, that the document be filed under seal. It was her request that the defense seceded to that under the circumstances. That certainly was inadvertent, could have just as easily remained under seal with Mr. Goldberger or with the State Attorney under those circumstances. Secondly, that it relates to the portions of it, specifically, within the MPA to deal with the grand jury proceeding, SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180901

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that would be a violation of Federal Rule Six. I note you just handed us your order about two minutes ago, Judge, so no one’s had an opportunity to review it, certainly appellate counsel has not had an opportunity to review it. I don’t know if you dealt with the appellate rule, but I do note that within your written order, that you, basically, said that in’ the second to last page, you said this order is no way to be interpreted as permission not to comply with U.S. District Court Judge Marra's previous orders. We respectfully submit that it would not comply with Judge Marra’s previously issued orders. We also believe that the supremacy clause, as Mr. Goldberger argued yesterday in conjunction with comity principle, that we think that there's a substantial likelihood on success of the merits on this. With regard to the likelihood of harm, this is a paramount issue here. It’s undisputed that this was a confidential agreement. It’s a confidential contract SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180902

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 10 between Mr. Epstein and the United States. United States vigorously defended Mr. Edwards when he came into federal court and filed an action to have the MPA released, Judge Marra subsequently entered an order. Another attempt that was made to make the MPA public again. All plaintiffs’ counsel has it. The only ones that don’t have it is the Post, under the circumstances, and public under the circumstances, but all the plaintiffs’ lawyers of the alleged victims, they either have the MPA and the addendum, which I will refer to as the MPA, or they have the ability to get that. That is very clear from Judge Marra’s order. So there’s certainly no harm to the plaintiffs from under these circumstances. And the harm in this instance is only to Mr. Epstein under the circumstances because as Judge Letz (phonetic) once said, it’s very much like an attorney/client privilege or a privilege document where once the proverbial horse is out of the barn, you can’t get him back in. SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180903

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 11 We cited a case called Mariner versus Baker 3 -- So. 39, So.2d 608 First District 1989. In the Mariner case, this was not a usual incident report and the Court, I know your Honor previously did a great deal of personal injury work and related work, you're very familiar. In fact, you commented yesterday and said, I don’t see how the MPA is going to be admissible in a civil proceeding anyway. Again, you’re not ruling on that ultimately, the judges in both the State and federal court cases will do that. In the Mariner case, the judge ordered that the defendants object at the direction of incident reports. The judge said, sorry, you’ve got to produce those incident reports. And the Court said, give them to me under seal because, again, we are talking about incident reports as distinct from an agreement between two parties which was deemed to be confidential between the United States government and Mr. Epstein. Only irreparable harm here as to Mr. Epstein because if it's released, SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180904

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12 you cannot remedy that harm on appeal. And in the Mariner case, if the judge said, if you put the documents under seal, which is exactly the situation we have now is, I will grant the stay and let the appellate court determine whether or not incident reports, which have a much lower threshold for production or for discovery reasons, and, again, there’s no harm in an instance like that, even in an incident report came out in the Mariner cases, so what. It won’t be used, you can’t use any of the information you obtained. In this particular instance, because it is confidential, there is no way the’ Court can remedy the harm. With regard to the defendants in this case, again, I think we’ve demonstrated both irreparable harm, and we believe a substantial likelihood on the success. Again, how do you demonstrate a substantial likelihood on the success? The fact that we would -- if this Court thought that we should prevail, my guess, you would not have ruled as you did, but as the Court is SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180905

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 13 aware, oh, surprise to all of the lawyers here. Sometimes judges get reversed. I know that's a shock to most of the lawyers in this room and most of the courts, but that happens on occasion, and, therefore, we believe we can show through the supremacy clause, the grand jury reference that we will prevail and that your order will be quashed. With regard to alleged harm by any other party, the Post in this instance reported at the sentencing of Mr. Epstein on or about June 30th of 2008. They waited until June ist of ‘09. This was such a pressing issue, the Post wanted to get this desperately out to the public, they were so anxious to do it, that they waited 11 months before they did anything. Mr. Edwards, who is not here today, filed a federal court action and those issues were talked about and discussed at some length with regard to Judge Marra’s two orders. Judge Marra’s rule, you can’t get them, if you want to get them, go to that SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180906

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 14 case, that would be Judge Hafele or two of Mr. Edwards’ cases are where is Mr. Kuvin's case is or Judge Marra, where Mr. -Edwards’ case is. Judge Marra can certainly control whether or not they should be released, and I’ve covered Mr. -- oh, and Mr. Edwards because he could have gone back to Judge Marra because he’s got one federal court case -- did he try for that form and get it -- no, they came in here. He tried to do it in a run around Judge Marra. He didn’t file his motion until late May of ‘09. My guess is it was Mr. Edwards who probably said to the Post, gee, why don’t you join in this, you haven't been here for 11 months, why don’t you come in now, maybe intervene. And then Mr. Kuvin, on behalf of his client, BB estate court case, came in on June 11th, again, almost a year to the date after Mr. Epstein’s sentence. It’s no burning issue, there’s no fire here to put out, giving us 30 days, or at least a reasonable period of time to file petition for writ, and then if the ‘ SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180907

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 15 Court denies our stay at least asking the appellate court for stay under the circumstances. There’s no harm to them. The harm is only to Mr. Epstein, and we think as a substantial likelihood, that we would succeed. Therefore, we would request the Court grant a stay as I’ve suggested in my proposed order for 30 days of giving Ms. Walsh and Ms. Compiani an opportunity to actually do their job under the circumstances, so the court reporter doesn’t have to work over the weekend to expedite transcripts for us, and secondly, if we file within the 30 days, then let the appellate court determine whether or not the stay remains or not. THE COURT: Thank you much. Ms. Shullman, don’t worry about responding to the issue of motive or seeking this relief or the timing of your request or party’s request. I don’t think that bears upon the merits of either parties. MS. SHULLMAN: The constitutional SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180908

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17° 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 right of access doesn’t have a waiver provision, your Honor. THE COURT: Well, go ahead. Let me | hear -- I’m on board so far with Mr. Critton’s version of, Judge, if you let it out, you let it out, so irreparable harm is kind of easy. I think that it is a two-prong test. I think he’s got to jump over both hurdles. I think he’s got to show some likelihood of success. If you want to spend some energy arguing that there’s no irreparable harm, you may do so, but if I hand it out today and everybody gets to see it, you can’t fix that tomorrow. MS. SHULLMAN: Sure. THE COURT: So I think they’ve established that. MS. SHULLMAN: Let me address that very briefly first, your Honor, to remind you in meeting this burden that they failed to meet yesterday, they identified four interests which they liken now to the motion to stay to the four harms. One, of -- for the first three of SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180909

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 them, they mentioned they have no standing to assert the compelling government interest, the government didn’t show up, the imminent threat tO the administration of justice, again, that’s the government’s issue. The innocent third party privacy rights, they have no Standing. The only one is, he’s not really articulated today it's some sort of invasion of Mr. Epstein’s privacy rights. Florida law is clear that those who are participants in crimes do not have privacy rights with respect to the facts and circumstances surrounding those crimes. So unless I'm going hear something outside of the context of mr. Epstein's criminal Prosecution, he has no privacy right in this agreement. THE COURT: Let me share with you what I'm thinking about doing, even at the conclusion of Mr. Critton’s presentation, and that is deny the motion to stay, but delay the release of the records in question until noon Friday. That will give them a little bit of time to see if the SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER EFTA00180910 |

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ; 18 Fourth sees this case from a different vantage point, a gifferent light, and maybe they’11 look down and Say, oh, Judge Colbath, you missed it and, you know, stay the matter. ‘That will give them a reasonable amount of time to get the transcripts to go to the Fourth because I'm a big fan of appellate review and making case law. MS. SHULLMAN: And I understand, your Honor, if you are suggesting a week from today, that’s a little bit long. Remember the status quo here, we are in sort of a strange procedural posture because your Honor decided that the initial closure was improper, BLE the recent request for closure was denied, so instead of a status quo where we have a document that should be released, it’s under seal where it shouldn't be, so any moment that it is kept under seal is a serious deprivation of the public and the press’s right to access, which you have already determined they have, we think you are correct, of course, so I would ask that any stay -- SUSAN S. WIGGINS. R.P.R. and OFFICtar, COURT REPORTER EFTA00180911

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

MaLYOdaY LYNOO TWIOTddO pue “u'd'u “SNISDIM ‘S NWSNS SINSOTOSTp syq AeTep Of pauT{[OUT ST j4aNnOoD eu ‘ATsnotaqo ‘qq zAousAZTaAUT FO JFTeYyaq UO *zouoyH anoA ‘Hutuzow pooy ?NIANM ‘UN ‘uot4ynqztysuoo ano JO YIATGq eyQq Jo Aep syL +LHNOD AHL ‘uap ATNC ‘¢NIANM ‘UW ‘AepTroy e st Aeptzq *3eyYy aw Hutttey z0zF noA yueyL ‘:LuUnood gaHL “pesoTo ere sqainoo syq pue Aepttoy e st Aeptzq yey Seu sastTape osTe sdTFJO s,Aauzoqjy 33e385 eyuL ‘éNVYWTINHS ‘SW ézeyqainy HutyjzAue of of JuemM sjuspuodsez zeyj0 Auy ‘*3uHTr TTIW ‘“unod AHL ‘ezay esodand ottqnd eyq sputu Zepun 4t ‘30esy UT ‘yuTYR I ‘Azresssoou st AeTep s,yeem e& QeYUQ YUTYR 3,uOp I ‘styj uo ATHXOtTNH 49e TTT yRAnog 3y A 3nq ‘puty eq TT,I ‘AepsenkL TTT} wey eath oR Quem NOA FI ‘zeezeo Aw ut szaqjeuw ssayy uo pueyeem e Auew jueds saey I ‘4no Aep pue ut Aep styuj op I ‘Huot 003 st yxeemM eC 4uTYuRy I Os ‘noA YATM peerzbestp AT {ny ROedser ay APS TIT’ I ‘NWWITINHS ‘SW *ZOUOH aznoA ‘Hutzepued s,aus ‘NOLLIWYO ‘UN 6T SZ ve | €Z | (aa TZ | 0z | 6T 8T LT | 9ST | ST { vT €T eT TT oT EFTA00180912

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

MBLYOdaY LYNOD TwIOIddO pue ‘u'd'u “SNIOOIM ‘S NwSnNs *Xeqs OF uoTtjow |ayQ Auep TI™ I ‘yonw Azsa noA yueyuL ‘34uHTT TTIW ‘LuUNOD FHL *pensst eq puoq e jo Hutqysod 3yQ qeyq Juewerztnbsez e yons ansst of AQTIOYINe au esAey SeOp AOUOH ANOA BAaTTSEq 3m ‘ezojyezeyuL ‘*‘yqOq AO suOTATpUOD ZeYy IO ‘puog qQueTtTotTgygns pue pooh e uodn pseuoTtytpuoo eq Aeuw metasxr Hutpued Aeqs wy :sAes QI ‘AqtTazoyjne ey 42n0D By seATH AI “Ww UOTROeSqns ut ATJOTAAIS paqeqotp s,jt puy ‘Teedde eyq FO SANjZeU SNOTOATAJ BY AZ0F pazeaod aze sqysoo pue vez ,skouz0qRe ANO YeYyQ sans ayew OF YUeM OM QeUQ WOeJ By JO Sssnedsq eseo sty} ut pensst st adAQ Aue jo Aeqs e JT peysod oq puog e Hutjasanbaexz eze am ‘3ZInsez e se os ‘Teadde jeyq FO HBut{ttz eu TOF 3SOD pue seaz HSutysenbsez seq oj Hutoh are aM pue snoTOATAZ ATeyntosqe st HutltF eze Aayq Teedde yons saAat{tTeq eM jnq ‘Hut{tns s,z0uoH 2nOoA yATM serHbe ATuo jou aM *puoq eu so Sutysod e seztnbexr yotym ‘aqtTnaza ey FO DO uotstaAozd ayqQ yno yutod ptnom em ‘Aeqjs e& YOns ansst OF 87am AOUOH ano& JT ‘ote'é etny Japun ynq ‘styj Fo 02 SZ vz x4 ZZ TZ 0z 6T 8T LT 9T ST vt eT eT TT OT EFTA00180913

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

UALNOdaA LYNOD TwIOTddO pue “u'd*y “SNISSIM ‘S Nwsns 1 *‘ez7ey UT 4,USeM jeYyQ ez98y3 Gz ut Hutyjewos sem azeayuq AyGnoyy ApoqAzaaa PZ | Jt 5utzepuom sem I :LuNnood AHL €Z | *AtrTenqoe eu oj z9Q9eT & S,JI ‘seweu Zz S,U®SZPTTYO sy SseTJTJueptT 3eyQ Jueuwnoop Tz | s,Jytqutetd ey S,3Il ‘yYaoNaaaIOO ‘uw 02 | ‘os ‘Butjoepez yqio0m Huty Aue sas 6T 3,uop I ‘Ano zeqyStTyhSty yoeTq Hrq Aw pey 8T | I ‘soweu ,STetATuT ey 20 soweu s,ueapTTyo LT | euq HButqauty sem ApoqAzeaq *er98y 9T ; ut soweu ,spty Aue ses 4,UpTp I ‘sjuawnoop ST . | OM} ey paeMeTAeT I :LunoOoD AHL vT (‘Aan eyQ jo Hutzeey vy Jo Ano ‘zeqeapts €T | PTey ezem sHutpessorzd HutmoTTos su) an *yoroirdde Tt pue ezey dn suoo sAsuz0ojje |ayq eAey OT | eu 42T ‘MON ‘oOSTe suoArSAS ueyQ JuSeTeTIIp 6 | STITT & sn Of SUWOS pue pTOsJuN sseseod 8 ' aseuq Moy Hut 4sezeqjut sAemte s,4I L ‘sq TITM esed STYQ UO MET 343 3eYUM sn YyorRdaQ 9 | pue sn [Te 3aznood aQeTTedde eyq 4ST IT.I S pue ‘puoq e 4sod 03 ‘uteqjsdg ‘2M ‘QUepUSezep p | ayq ‘jueaow 3yq Teduod oj Asenbaz € | ayy Auep TTT I ‘AepsazanyL, uoou TTjun Zz ’ squownsop ay3 Jo sseater ayq AeTep TII™ I T | TZ | EFTA00180914

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

YaLHOdaY LYNOD TWIOIddO pue “Y*d*u “SNIODIM ‘*S Nwsns ey uo puejs JT -- 203 wstueyoou e s,azayR JT MouUX 3,UOp IT ‘wWayQ 43aH pue sauwods of squeM -- seawod yey ApoqAue pue ‘uoou je AepsanyL TTT eseyq OF UO Buey T[T,I os ‘4yHtsrI Ttw *azeyy FO Yno saweu esoy. Aoepezr of Ysenbexz ano Auep pue ‘AepzeqjsaA noA aaeh I jeu Huttnz Aw Mauer [TT™ I 'Lunoo FHL ‘Sutpuejs e saey AsuL ‘¢NVWIINHS ‘SN -- YATM Op O03 Huty jou savy AsyL ‘sHutpesecsorzd aseyq yatm op 03 Suty jou saey jeu etdosad jussouut aze eseuL ‘szojertdsuod-o9 sere asayQ yeu queunbre sy spew uTAnNY ‘“2WM ‘peyjnoesord eq 09 Butoh jou eze yey etTdoad aze sseyq sAes Juewunoop eyj UT peTytjAuept sey suo ou pue ‘zeHreqpTOON “AW ‘S®A ‘:+LUNOD AHL ‘ezey dn saueu z3ay30 0} seouszezezr ere azeyuQ ‘HutyAqeyo azsey dn [TP 82,9M STTUM ‘xYaOUTaCIOO ‘UW ‘XpoqAzeae Aq peubts usaaa Jou s, jeyq sefed omy ysnl€ st auo puoosas ey pue ‘usAes ySnoxzyQ suo abed st suo *ATQOexe ‘QyHTI 8r,NOA +LUNOOD AHL ‘zouoH anoA ‘STTTxXs ano jo 4893 8 S,3I :NOLLIND ‘UW (44 S@ ve | €z | 2% r2 | 0z | 6T LT 9T ST | vT €T eT | TT { OT EFTA00180915

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

YaALYOdaY LYNOD IWIOIddO pue “u’d'u “SNIOSIM ‘S NwSsns ey Butozoy noA ezy ‘:uROURAGIOO ‘UW ‘Aepoqj yotnb peubts yt yeh TT,amM pue Qeyq xezy ‘yeeA 'LYNNOD AHL ‘ATWYOtTND zep1z0 qeyuy peeu TT,noA puy 'MHDURaCION ‘UW *puoq zOJ uot jOow sey SutAuep ‘9 ‘Aepsanyy, uoou Ttjun squseunoop sseyy yO HutTeesun 20 eansojToOstp syq HutAejtep ‘¢ ‘Aeqs ayy ButAuep ‘vw ‘sexA :LuHNOD AHL éAeqs oy H5utAueq ‘éNYWITINHS ‘SW ézepz0 ueqatTzamM e r8y4eH0R Ang 'LuYnoo AHL é3ey49 op 03 BHSutoh nok eazy :yHOURACTIOD “UW -- SutAusep Zepz0 usqqTImM e dn aqtazm of SHutohb noA eze ‘zOUOH ANOK :INWIdWOOD ‘SW -- pssu 3,u0op NOx ‘petTeesun suoocoseq Aeu AsyQ pue wey sseetTez OF 4ANOD |syQ HutyjoezTtp zepzo0 ue Op pTnomM IT :NYWTINHS ‘SW “uot zoOepezt ON :LHNOD AHL ‘epew aq 03 suoTIOepeaz ou ere szsyy JI *NVWWTINHS °SW ‘qgno wey ssed pue sdaqs asnoy anos ix4 SZ vz €Z (x4 TZ 02 6T 8T LT 9T ST | vT eT ZT | It oT ‘ EFTA00180916

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

YALYOdaY LYNOD TWIOIAAO pue "Y'd'u “SNIODIM ‘*S Nwsns (*‘pepntouos Aanf€ syQ jo Hutzesy 243 Septs3zno pTey eouerezuOo azeq apts) ‘Hutuzow styz sn Hutaow 203 ‘zouoH anoA ‘noA yueyL :NOLLIUO “UW éqgdtzosuezq e 4a6 ued om OS pusyeeM BY TSAO YIOM OQ AaqQAOder 4ANO0d vz SZ me £2 | | (x4 TZ | 02 [ 6T LT { 9T ST vt ET Zt It OT EFTA00180917

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

WaLYOdad LYNOD TwIOIddO pue “u'd*u "SNIODIM ‘S Nwsns “U'd'u'‘SNIOOIM ‘S Nysns eran) “6002 eunr yo Aep yI6Z STYQ SaAnQeubts [Tetrotyyo Aw pextyye OjJuNnSezeYy SsAeY I ‘dORUYAHM SSANLIM NI *sHhutpssosoird ptes je useyeq sajououeys Aw Jo uotAdtz9suer aqjeanooe pue enzq e jueserdeaz ‘aatsntout ‘pz O03 T worzz pezequnu sefed Hutpeosezd syq jeu pue ‘ptesezojye soertd pue owt3 ay ye 3an0D eYya azojzeq shutpessozd Hutohbez0z3 |ayQ 4yrzodexz ptp pure o4 peztzoyjzne sem T jeyy AztTqre0 Aqezey op ‘!epTtz0TaA ‘Ajuno) yoreg wtTeqd TOF pue ut ‘uOTSTATG TeuUTUTIZD ‘QTMNOATO TeTOTPNe YyQueEeqTTaA eyQ A0OF zaqzo0dey 4aN0D TeTOTIFO ‘''uU'd'u ‘SNIODIM ‘S NwSns ‘I “HOWSa WIVd dO ALNNOO ‘WOINOTA JO ALVLS AHL ZLWYOTaAITLuao SZ SZ €Z | eZ 02 | 6T 8T | LT 9T ST vT €T eT TT OT EFTA00180918

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

= IOPEE ‘Td “Yorag ulyeg IsoAy OOP MIN “YNOg snuUaAY URTTe.NSNY (SZ ‘V'd ‘SSIAM ¥ UADUAAA ION ‘AUNGUALLV UADUIAA TON ‘WV MOV! pue lOpee Td YoRog Wyed ISOM 00h MING ‘OAL J9/9e].J YON CIS NVWA109 YaLLLNT ‘NOLLMID ‘NVWUNd NOLLID 'd LYddOu LOPEE ‘Ta ‘yovog wyeg say Al] wooy AemMYSIH OIXIG YON $07 asnoyyinoy) Ayunod qyovog wyed HLVd@100 AdadAa ATAVYONOH jsOg yoRog Weg dy, JO} Jasunodg ZO9EE ‘Ta ‘eduey, (109€€) Z09Z XO Od OOTT AINg ‘oALIC AaTYSY YON OOF NVWTINHS “1 VWNNVAC LOPEe Ta ‘yoeog wyeg 1s9\ AeMyYsiH OXI YON [0p yorog Wyeg IsoM-294JO S,AdUIONY RIS OOUV NOSNAAALS Hane “a'q Joy jasunog OIPEE ‘Ta ‘sueprey yorog weg 007 AIINg ‘preAg|nog WOd $Z6Z "Vd ‘NIAQ-10d0dT NIAN “L YAONAS “MA 40} esuNOT) POCee TA ‘aepsopne’y 310.4 OS9T ANG ‘preagTnog sejO se] Sey [OP UATIGV LATAINASOU NIFALSHLOU UAOUA ‘f WVITIIM 1OPEE TA “yovog wyeg SoM OOF BINs ‘onUDsAY UPTTRYsNYy YINOS QOS JOLISIC. WIoYyINOG-s04JO s,AdWIO}V “S') NVWO'S 'H Adusddae :01 ‘6007 ‘ouns Jo Aep r¥og SIU) ssaudxq Je1opa,j pur [eW-a Aq Juas usaq sey Burosai0y oy) Jo Adoo v Wey) AMLLYAD AGAUGH | AOTANAS AO ALVOMELYAO EFTA00180919

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

ILEZLT “ON Jeg BPO} | HSTVM-UATS aN +o - ‘Ag l JQUOTINI toj jesunoy mos edmyMysTemouel SSPS-6S9 (19S) El6S-1OPEE Td “Yorog wyeg soy €OS MING ‘OAL J9]3e],J yINOS 10S ‘Vd ‘SVDUVA ¥ INVIUWOO ‘HS TVM-YaTSNAUN | JO INVIdWOO ‘f VUVEUVEA pue HSTVM-UA ISNA ANVE | EFTA00180920