(Continued from Half 1)
Discovering Skeptic Con-Man within the Epstein Information, Half 2.
Seckel asks Epstein for a “secured credit” loan of $8 million (!). Epstein appears to be keen to supply 6 million.
To: Al seckel
From: Jeevacation@gmail.com
Despatched: Tue 12/7/2010 6:52:54 PM
Topic: Re: Query
What collateral is the difficulty
Sorry for all of the typos .Despatched from my iPhonc
On Dec 7, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Al seckel vrotc:
Can we make it 8 million in secured credit score? Simply simpler. What can be
your mortgage price?
From: Jeevacation To: Al seckel a
Despatched: Tue, December 7, 2010 10:38:26 AM
Topic: Re: Query
6 million
Sorry for all of the typos .Despatched from my iPhoneOn Dcc 7, 2010, at 1:35 PM, Al seckel wrote:
Critical query for a chance:
For a 3.5 mil mortgage for one yr…
How a lot precise and actual secured collateral would you want (quantity of
worth)?
What can be your mortgage price?
Is that this potential?
That is really an actual query.
Appreciatively,
Al
What’s the context of this uncommon negotiation?
—————————————————————————————————————————–
From: Jeffrey Epstein <“jeevacation@gmail.com>
To: Al seckel < >
Despatched: Tue, June 15, 2010 8:37:08 PM
Topic: Re: sunday company
all the time
On The, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:27 PM, Al seckel <
Sean Carroll, Caltech physicist
M. Carroll
http://mposterousuniverse.com/self.html
> wrote:
Joe Kirchvink, Caltech geology professor, pal since 1982. enjoyable, sensible, wacky.
http://www.gps.caltech.edu/%7Ejkirschvink/
http://www.gps.caltech.edu/%7Ejkirschvink/PEbio I .htmOn Apr 17, 2009, at 1:17 PM, Al seckel wrote:
Jeff,
Good to speak to you this morning on this topic, as it’s one I’m solely snug
with. 😉
The listing I despatched you yesterday has the standards of thinkers, out of the field. These are amongst
the very brightest those who I do know, the place I take pleasure in listening to them, and so they
say insightful issues together with a deep understanding of the subject material.
Mental judgment together with mental capacity. The 2 do not all the time go
hand-in-hand. That is additionally an inventory of people that have a sure sort of intelligence,
however might not essentially have social intelligence, i.e, they’re a bit awkward.
Jay is extremely expert socially in comparison with a number of the individuals on this listing. Simply fyi. I
personally am not bothered by social awkwardness, however that is your factor, and
you want to a superb combine, and that’s comprehensible. Standards will simply be
totally different then.
You introduced up Jay. It is a good instance. Jay does pay attention, after which tends to supply up his
personal views. I very a lot take pleasure in interacting with Jay, and he’s a detailed pal, and
though I’ll not all the time agree with him, he does all the time provide up concepts which can be
fascinating and value eager about. That is why I put him on the listing. He has a
sure means he maps the world and he’s additionally very properly learn and knowledgeable. That is
not an argument about Jay, simply why I put him on the listing. I’d additionally put
Nathan in the identical class as Jay. Does not pay attention a lot, pontificates, do not
all the time agree with what he says, however he tends to say issues which can be provocative
and fascinating. He has an fascinating means of mapping the world too, and is properly
learn and knowledgeable. I take pleasure in bantering with each of them, and depend them as actual
mates that I’ve identified and frolicked with for a few years.
A number of the names listed are titans of mental ego. Steven Wolfram being amongst the
worst of them. Others are very shy and socially and vogue awkward, however are
amongst the very brightest and knowledgeable that I do know, and can run mental
circles round a number of the names on this listing.
I very very similar to the thought of your asking individuals on this listing to contribute names of the ten
“brightest” those who they know. This listing would supply a superb set of
references.
Please observe, that though I’ve a variety of thinkers, I’ve distinctly prevented individuals
who map the world in a magical means, and would encourage us to keep away from “magical
thinkers.From: Jeevacation <jeevacationafromailicom>
To: Al seckel
Despatched: Friday, April 17, 2009 5:16:16 AM
Topic: Re: Re:
Despatched from my iPhone
On Apr 16, 2009, at 6:33 PM, Al secke otc:
Anybody you do not know on a right away listing, ask me or google
them. All are good mates of mine for years, however these very excessive finish
circles journey collectively, so you need to be very acquainted with nearly all
of them. And, a number of that you do not know, are off the charts, and in
some respects smarter than those which can be acquainted… 😉 They only
did not search the limelight. I’ve marked these individuals with an
asterisk. Not everybody on this listing is a scientist.
There isn’t any order to this listing (it is a cross-section off the highest of my head). I can
consider extra names if I put my thoughts to it, however lets begin right here:
I’m joyful to debate anybody right here
Nathan Mhyrvoid *Catherine Mohr *Jay Walker
Christof Koch *Terry Sejnowski Danny Hillis
*Bran Ferren Vilamur Ramachandran Lisa Randall
Frances Arnold Jesse Dylan Larry Web page Elon Musk
Stephen Wolfram Steve Juvertson *Pablo Ho
Jaron Lanier Craig Venter paul Kirkaas Yossi Vardi
*Eric Mjolsness *Mike Douglas Dean Kamen
*Shelly Glashow *Derrick Ashong James Cameron
*Ronald Crowley *Jeffrey Lehman Christine Maxwell
*Brock Pierce *Wealthy Roberts *Lee Stein *Gerry Sussman
*John Conway Dan Dubno (simply because he’s very fascinating)
From: Jeffrey Epstein < jeevacation@gmail.com>To: Al seckel
Despatched: Thursday, April 16, 2009 2:56:34 PM
Topic: Re:
in fact
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Al seckel wrote:
Ah, you have got really requested my specialty. Significantly. Okay, totally different
disciplines and enterprise too?
From: Jeffrey it m>
To: Al seckel
Despatched: Thu y„ : : PM
Topic
may you give me an inventory of who you suppose would take pleasure in a get collectively in florida„
sensible , out of the field varieties
—————————————————————————————————————————- Wow, take a look at this…Epstein is suing two people – SCOTT ROTHSTEIN and
BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, and goes to nice lengths to stop Al Seckel from giving a deposition on the case!
(Edwards is an writer who wrote Relentless Pursuit: My Struggle for the Victims of Jeffrey Epstein, and several other different books like this.)
Apparently Edwards has subpoenaed Seckel to provide a deposition, and Epstein is desperately combating in opposition to this! What
is Epstein afraid that Seckel will say in a deposition, to file pages
and pages of high-priced legal professionals’ citations and arguments to stop
Seckel’s deposition from going down????
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO OUASH SUBPOENA AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
TO PREVENT DEPOSITION OF ALFRED SECKEL
Plaintiff Jeffrey Epstein strikes the Courtroom, pursuant to Rule 1.280 and Rule 1.410, Florida
Guidelines of Civil Process, for entry of a protecting order and an order quashing a subpoena
commanding non-party Alfred Seckel to seem for deposition in Los Angeles, California on
Might 23, 2011, which subpoena Defendant Bradley J. Edwards (“Edwards”) has observed over the
Plaintiffs objection. The grounds for this Movement are:
1. On or about April 7, 2011, counsel to Edwards observed the deposition of Mr.
Seckel, even supposing counsel to Edwards was suggested by Plaintiffs counsel that Mr.
Seckel has no data of any problem on this case and is barely identified to the Plaintiff in any respect. A
copy of the Discover and Subpoena is hooked up as Exhibit A.
2. The Plaintiff seeks an order quashing the subpoena and entry of a protecting order
to stop the taking of this deposition indefinitely as a result of Mr. Seckel has no related
details about this case and to permit the deposition would successfully condone harassment
What follows are a half-dozen pages of legalese. That is past bizarre!!
