Jeff Epstein Wants to Muzzle Jack Scarola.

The twisted tale of billionaire Jeff Epstein rolls on, with inevitable collateral litigation arising from the original claims of underage sexual abuse.

In the latest iteration, Epsteins's complaint against former RRA attorney Brad Edwards was dismissed with leave to amend, and a motion to muzzle Edwards' counsel Jack Scarola was denied as well:

Edwards filed a counterclaim, alleging Epstein filed the lawsuit to get Edwards to back down from representing the victims.

“Mr. Epstein had to pay more to settle these cases than he would have if Mr. Edwards wasn’t out there putting all this pressure on him,” said attorney Jack Scarola, who represents Edwards. “That’s Mr. Edwards’ job ... to put as much legitimate pressure on the defendant as he possibly could and he obviously did an extremely effective job.”

Epstein pleaded guilty to two felony charges: soliciting prostitution and soliciting a minor for prostitution. He served 13 months in the county jail and has to register as a lifelong sex offender.

Representing Epstein, attorney Joseph Ackerman argued unsuccessfully for a gag order. Ackerman said Scarola has repeatedly made statements to several news organizations about the case.

“Mr. Scarola has constantly referred to Mr. Epstein as a pedophile and there’s been no proof of that anywhere,” Ackerman said. “Muzzling lawyers who may wish to make public statements has been long recognized as within the court’s inherent power ... We don’t believe it’s appropriate to wage a media campaign and taint the jury pool.”

Scarola said it would be unconstitutional to impose a gag order.

“There is a complete and total absence of proof that we have engaged in any conduct whatsoever that could be prohibited,” Scarola said.

Scarola said he and Edwards have been asked to appear on national television as well as received interview requests from the foreign press. Scarola said he has been selective in his interviews.

 Exactly -- AVN will just have to wait.

Journalist Conchita Sarnoff provides an interesting first-person report on the hearing and notes that she may or may not have been required to appear for a deposition at Fowler's offices on Brickell back in May.

So far this litigation is moving pretty smoothly I would say.