DOJ-OGR-00005718.jpg

679 KB

Extraction Summary

4
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
5
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal filing (motion/memorandum of law)
File Size: 679 KB
Summary

This document is Page 6 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) arguing against the admissibility of a specific document compilation. The text details how former Epstein employee Alfredo Rodriguez attempted to sell 97 pages of evidence to lawyer Brad Edwards in 2009, leading to an FBI sting operation where Rodriguez sold the documents to an undercover officer for $50,000. The filing argues these documents are unauthenticated hearsay, lack relevance to the current indictment, and should be excluded.

People (4)

Name Role Context
Alfredo Rodriguez Former Epstein employee
Deceased; attempted to sell document compilation to Brad Edwards in 2009; subject of a criminal complaint and FBI sting.
Brad Edwards Lawyer
Involved in suing Epstein in 2009; approached by Rodriguez to buy evidence.
Jeffrey Epstein Defendant (mentioned)
Subject of lawsuits and evidence offered by Rodriguez.
Undercover officer Law Enforcement
FBI agent who received the 97 pages from Rodriguez in exchange for money during a sting.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
FBI
Set up a sting operation to acquire documents from Rodriguez.
United States Government
Prosecution; the filing argues against the Government's claims regarding the documents.
Southern District of Florida (S.D. Fla)
Court where United States v. Rodriguez was filed.

Timeline (2 events)

2009
FBI Sting Operation
Unknown (likely Florida)
2009
Filing of Criminal Complaint against Rodriguez
S.D. Fla
Alfredo Rodriguez US Government

Locations (1)

Location Context
Jurisdiction of the Rodriguez case.

Relationships (2)

Alfredo Rodriguez Employment Jeffrey Epstein
Described as 'former Epstein employee'
Brad Edwards Legal Adversary Jeffrey Epstein
Described as 'one of the lawyers who was involved in suing Mr. Epstein in 2009'

Key Quotes (5)

"The provenance of the exhibit is particularly troubling."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00005718.jpg
Quote #1
"A sting operation was set up by the FBI during which the 97 pages were provided to an undercover officer in exchange for $50,000."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00005718.jpg
Quote #2
"what is clear, however, is that they are neither authentic nor relevant."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00005718.jpg
Quote #3
"It is also obvious that the documents are hearsay..."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00005718.jpg
Quote #4
"Thus, who may or may not be the author of whatever ended up as these photocopies is not evidence that can or should be considered by any jury in this matter."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00005718.jpg
Quote #5

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,995 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 390 Filed 10/29/21 Page 6 of 11
The provenance of the exhibit is particularly troubling. The document compilation allegedly surfaced in connection with a former Epstein employee, Alfredo Rodriguez, now deceased. Mr. Rodriguez was attempting to sell the compilation to Brad Edwards, one of the lawyers who was involved in suing Mr. Epstein in 2009.
According to the Criminal Complaint filed against Mr. Rodriguez in 2009, Mr. Rodriguez approached one of the lawyers and offered to sell the lawyer evidence against Mr. Epstein. United States v. Rodriguez, Case No. 9:09-mj-08308-LRJ (S.D. Fla), ECF No. 3, ¶¶3-7. A sting operation was set up by the FBI during which the 97 pages were provided to an undercover officer in exchange for $50,000. Id. at ¶¶ 8-11.
It is unclear what the Government claims these documents are – what is clear, however, is that they are neither authentic nor relevant. It is also obvious that the documents are hearsay, an out of court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted, in violation of Fed. R. Evid. 801. There is no witness who could identify or attest that these documents qualify for any exception to the hearsay rule.
Given their unknown date of creation, the lack of any authenticating witness, and the fact that the documents do not appear until 2009 – five years after the end of the conspiracies charged in the indictment -- there is no relevance that can be attached to the information. Moreover, any arguable relevance is outweighed by the prejudicial considerations under Fed. R. Evid. 403. It is unclear, and unknown, who created the documents, when they were created, or how they were created. The documents cannot be authenticated and no evidentiary foundation exists that would allow for the admission of the documents. Thus, who may or may not be the author of whatever ended up as these photocopies is not evidence that can or should be considered by any jury in this matter.
2
DOJ-OGR-00005718

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document