HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010566.jpg
1.29 MB
Extraction Summary
3
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing (court document - statement of undisputed facts)
File Size:
1.29 MB
Summary
This is a 'Statement of Undisputed Facts' filed by Defendant Bradley J. Edwards in a civil case brought by Plaintiff Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach County, Florida (Case No. 50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG). The document asserts that Epstein has a sexual preference for young children, citing a deposition from March 17, 2010, where Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment. A footnote argues that Edwards is entitled to an adverse inference regarding Epstein's silence.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Plaintiff |
Plaintiff in the civil suit; subject of the 'Statement of Undisputed Facts' regarding sexual preference for children.
|
| Scott Rothstein | Defendant |
Sued individually by Epstein.
|
| Bradley J. Edwards | Defendant / Attorney |
Sued individually; filing the Statement of Undisputed Facts.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit |
Court where the case is filed (Palm Beach County, Florida).
|
Timeline (1 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction of the court.
|
Relationships (2)
Epstein is Plaintiff vs. Edwards as Defendant in Case No. 50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG
Epstein is Plaintiff vs. Rothstein as Defendant
Key Quotes (3)
"Defendant Epstein has a sexual preference for young children."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010566.jpg
Quote #1
"When questioned about this subject at his deposition, Epstein invoked his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent rather than make an incriminating admission."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010566.jpg
Quote #2
"Edwards is entitled to the adverse inference against Epstein that, had Epstein answered, the answer would have been unfavorable to him."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010566.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,456 characters)
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM
BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM
BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
Case No.:50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and
BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually,
BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, individually,
Defendants,
_________________________________/
_________________________________/
STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS
Defendant Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., offers the following specific facts as the undisputed
material facts in this case. Each of the following facts is numbered separately and individually to
facilitate Epstein’s required compliance with Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(c) (“The adverse party shall
identify . . . any summary judgment evidence on which the adverse party relies.”). All
referenced exhibits and attachments have previously been filed with the Court and provided to
Epstein.
material facts in this case. Each of the following facts is numbered separately and individually to
facilitate Epstein’s required compliance with Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(c) (“The adverse party shall
identify . . . any summary judgment evidence on which the adverse party relies.”). All
referenced exhibits and attachments have previously been filed with the Court and provided to
Epstein.
Sexual Abuse of Children By Epstein
1. Defendant Epstein has a sexual preference for young children. Deposition of
Jeffrey Epstein, Mar. 17, 2010, at 110 (hereinafter “Epstein Depo.”) (Deposition Attachment
#1).¹
Jeffrey Epstein, Mar. 17, 2010, at 110 (hereinafter “Epstein Depo.”) (Deposition Attachment
#1).¹
____________________
¹ When questioned about this subject at his deposition, Epstein invoked his Fifth Amendment right to
remain silent rather than make an incriminating admission. Accordingly, Edwards is entitled to the
adverse inference against Epstein that, had Epstein answered, the answer would have been unfavorable to
him. “[I]t is well-settled that the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to
¹ When questioned about this subject at his deposition, Epstein invoked his Fifth Amendment right to
remain silent rather than make an incriminating admission. Accordingly, Edwards is entitled to the
adverse inference against Epstein that, had Epstein answered, the answer would have been unfavorable to
him. “[I]t is well-settled that the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010566
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document