Edwards
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
15 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Jane Doe
|
Client |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
L.M.
|
Client |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Wild
|
Client |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
E.W.
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Dershowitz
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jane Doe
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Wild
|
Representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN
|
Professional later |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Edwards' clients
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
|
Litigation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
AUSA Villafaña
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane Doe No. 1 & 2
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mazzuca
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Virginia Giuffre
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN
|
Former professional connection |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Three Victims
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
minor girls
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Delivery of the sermon 'Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God' to the Enfield congregation. | Enfield | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of Florida Bar complaint against Edwards. | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein voluntarily dismissed his claims against Edwards. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Edwards filed a Motion for Contempt regarding the false information about Brunel. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of CVRA petition by Edwards. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Settlement of three cases filed by Edwards against Epstein. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Unfounded filing of claims against Edwards by Epstein. | Legal proceedings | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of civil complaints by Edwards for three clients. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Discovery efforts to obtain photographic materials regarding Jane Doe No. 3 held by federal agenc... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Edwards' Summary Judgment hearing (Epstein dismissed case morning of). | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal action | Villafaña informed Edwards about Epstein's state plea but did not mention the NPA. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Civil lawsuits filed against Epstein by Edwards and others. | Florida (implied) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of complaint by Epstein | Florida Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein refused to answer basic discovery questions regarding the lawsuit. | Legal Discovery Proceedings | View |
| N/A | Legal filing | Edwards filed a CVRA petition after learning of the state plea. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein filed a summary judgment motion regarding federal nexus. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | In-camera disclosure of settlement amounts. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal Discovery/Depositions | Legal proceedings | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cases filed by Edwards against Epstein | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of CVRA action and subsequent Motion to reopen. | S.D. Fla. | View |
| N/A | N/A | Settlement of previous lawsuits | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of Second Amended Complaint | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of Motion for Summary Judgment | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Discovery/Depositions pursued by Edwards | Litigation process | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of RICO claim | Federal Court | View |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010578.jpg
This document page details the terms of a 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement between Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office, which included immunity for co-conspirators like Nadia Marcinkova. It also highlights that victims E.W. and L.M. were misled by the FBI regarding the status of the investigation after a plea deal had already been reached.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010577.jpg
This document (page 12 of a House Oversight report) details evidence collected by the Palm Beach Police Department, specifically message pads showing Epstein's staff scheduled girls ages 12-16 daily. It describes the U.S. Attorney's Office's preparation of federal charges, including an 82-page prosecution memo and a 53-page indictment. The text includes a direct quote from a September 19, 2007 email from AUSA Villafaña to Epstein's lawyer, Jay Lefkowitz, demanding a conclusion to plea negotiations by the following Monday.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010576.jpg
This document, likely an affidavit by attorney Bradley Edwards from the House Oversight production, details Epstein's obstruction of justice and evidence collection by the Palm Beach Police. It describes an incident where Epstein diverted his private plane to the US Virgin Islands to prevent the FBI from serving a subpoena to Nadia Marcinkova, while simultaneously harassing her and Sarah Kellen to ensure their silence. It also details the Palm Beach Police investigation in late 2005, including a trash pull that revealed Epstein purchased books on sexual slavery and training (e.g., 'SlaveCraft' and 'Training with Miss Abernathy') via Amazon.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010570.jpg
This document is a legal filing (page 5) stamped by House Oversight, detailing allegations that Epstein's attorneys were aware of his scheme to recruit minors and worked jointly with U.S. Prosecutors to minimize his civil exposure. It cites an October 3, 2007 email from AUSA Marie Villafaña to Epstein's lawyer Jay Lefkowitz, which includes a draft letter stating that the U.S. government identified 40 victims of Epstein in Palm Beach, describing sexual acts ranging from massage to intercourse. The text also notes Epstein's agreement to not contest jurisdiction for civil damages under 18 USC 2255.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010569.jpg
This page of a legal filing details a specific sexual incident involving Jeffrey Epstein and a victim identified as 'S.G.', including graphic descriptions of Epstein's body. The document asserts that while 'Edwards' believes the victim count exceeds forty, evidence suggests the number of underage girls molested is in the hundreds. It also references Epstein invoking the 5th Amendment during a 2010 deposition and discusses negotiations between Epstein's legal team and the U.S. Attorney's Office to avoid federal felony charges.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023368.jpg
This document is a 'Table of Authorities' page from a legal filing, marked with Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023368. It lists various legal precedents and case citations, primarily focusing on litigation related to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, sovereign immunity, and international liability (Alien Tort Statute). While the document is part of a collection likely reviewed by the House Oversight Committee (possibly related to an investigation involving Epstein or similar legal themes of jurisdiction/immunity), this specific page contains no direct mentions of Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, or their associates.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023049.jpg
This article from The Virgin Islands Daily News details the 'unusual level of collaboration' between federal prosecutors (including Alexander Acosta and A. Marie Villafana) and Jeffrey Epstein's legal team during the negotiation of his non-prosecution agreement. It highlights the exclusion of victims from the process, the 'VIP treatment' Epstein received in jail (including work release authorized by Sheriff Ric Bradshaw), and subsequent legal battles by victims like 'Jane Doe No. 1' (Wild) and Jena-Lisa Jones to invalidate the agreement. The document also reveals that in 2011, the NY District Attorney's office under Cyrus Vance argued on Epstein's behalf to reduce his sex offender status, a move that shocked the presiding judge.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011946.jpg
This document, likely an excerpt from a larger report or article (marked House Oversight), summarizes court filings related to the Epstein case. It details Ghislaine Maxwell's evasion of a deposition to attend Chelsea Clinton's wedding, Alfredo Rodriguez's theft of a 'Holy Grail' victim journal, and Bill Clinton's presence in Epstein's flight logs and phone directory. The text also describes Epstein's intimidation tactics against a victim identified as 'Jane Doe,' causing her to flee her home.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015592.jpg
This document is page 3 of a legal motion filed by Alan Dershowitz requesting a modification to a Confidentiality Order. Dershowitz argues he must be allowed to contact witnesses to verify or disprove allegations made by Virginia Roberts (Giuffre), asserting that the Plaintiffs (represented by Edwards and Cassell) may not have conducted a reasonable investigation before filing suit. The text references a previous filing from November 23, 2015, and cites case law regarding the benefits of openness in court proceedings.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015554.jpg
This document appears to be a cover page or separator sheet for a legal filing supplement in the case of Edwards adv. Epstein (Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG). It contains no body text, only the case header, a page number (3), and a House Oversight Bates stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015553.jpg
This document is a 'Counsel List' page from a legal filing in the case of Edwards adv. Epstein (Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG), likely from 2009 based on the case number. It lists contact information for attorneys representing Jeffrey Epstein (Jack Goldberger, Martin Weinberg, Joseph Ackerman, and the firm Farmer, Jaffe, et al.) and an attorney representing Scott Rothstein (Marc S. Nurik). The document includes email addresses, physical addresses in Florida and Massachusetts, and phone/fax numbers.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015545.jpg
This document contains responses to legal interrogatories (questions 13-16) provided by attorneys Edwards and Cassell regarding their client, Jane Doe #3. It details that Jane Doe #3 began informing Brad Edwards of abuse allegations involving Dershowitz via phone calls starting in 2011 and filed a public affidavit in 2015. The attorneys state they have not seen photographic evidence of Jane Doe #3 with Dershowitz but are attempting to obtain such materials from the U.S. Attorney's Office.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015030.jpg
This document is page 3 of 4 of a printed web article from the Palm Beach Post, dated September 27, 2017. It details legal arguments by attorneys Edwards and Cassell, who are urging Judge Marra to rule that federal prosecutors violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act in the Jeffrey Epstein case. The document discusses potential remedies, including restitution and legal fees, while Cassell emphasizes that the effort is about justice rather than money. The page also includes unrelated local news sidebars about the Wellington council and a cold-case arrest.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015029.jpg
This document is a printout of a news article (likely Palm Beach Post) dated September 27, 2017, discussing the potential reopening of the Jeffrey Epstein case. It details the legal arguments by victims' lawyers Edwards and Cassell that the 2008 non-prosecution agreement was illegal because federal prosecutors (including Alex Acosta and Marie Villafana) failed to confer with victims as required by the Crime Victims' Rights Act. The text highlights the secrecy of the deal, the alleged deception of victims via letters claiming the investigation was ongoing, and the involvement of high-profile figures like Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013429.jpg
This document is an archived page from the Palm Beach Daily News dated June 11, 2009, discussing the legal battle to unseal Jeffrey Epstein's plea deal. It features statements from attorney Edwards, representing three underage victims, and Deanna Shullman, representing the press, both arguing that the sealing of the plea agreement is unusual and violates public records rights in Florida. The document is stamped with 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013429', indicating it is part of a congressional investigation file.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013402.jpg
This document is page 9 of a legal motion in the case 'Edwards adv. Epstein' (Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG). It argues that Jeffrey Epstein's claims linking Edwards to Scott Rothstein's Ponzi scheme were completely baseless, noting that Epstein voluntarily dismissed the claims right before a summary judgment hearing. The text asserts Edwards had no involvement in the scheme and characterizes Epstein's allegations as lacking substance.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013401.jpg
This document is page 8 of a legal filing (Second Renewed Motion for Leave to Assert Claim for Punitive Damages) in the case of Edwards adv. Epstein (Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG). The text presents a legal argument regarding the standard for Summary Judgment under Florida law, citing various precedents to argue that the record establishes Edwards's conduct cannot create liability in favor of Epstein. The page bears the Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013401.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013396.jpg
This document is page 3 of a 'Second Renewed Motion for Leave to Assert Claim for Punitive Damages' in the case of Edwards adv. Epstein. The text presents legal arguments citing Florida statutes and case law (specifically Section 768.72) to establish that a formal evidentiary hearing is not required to amend a complaint for punitive damages, as a 'proffer' of evidence is sufficient. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013395.jpg
Page 2 of a 'Second Renewed Motion for Leave to Assert Claim for Punitive Damages' in the case of Edwards vs. Epstein (Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG). The document argues that Epstein filed previous motions solely to intimidate Edwards and his clients into abandoning their claims. The bulk of the text outlines the 'Applicable Law' regarding the standard of proof required to plead punitive damages in Florida, citing various precedents to establish that the burden is lower than that for summary judgment.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013388.jpg
This page from a legal filing (page 19) argues that 'Edwards' is entitled to summary judgment because Jeffrey Epstein repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment. The document asserts that adverse inferences must be drawn from Epstein's silence, leading to the conclusion that he was a 'serial molester of children' rather than a victim of improper lawsuits. It cites Florida case law to support the argument that silence in civil cases can be used as evidence against a party.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013386.jpg
This document is page 17 of a legal filing arguing that Epstein's lawsuit against Edwards should be dismissed under Florida's 'sword and shield doctrine.' The text details how Epstein is seeking money damages from Edwards while simultaneously invoking the Fifth Amendment to refuse answering basic discovery questions about his claims that Edwards 'ginned up' allegations or 'fabricated' cases. The filing cites multiple Florida precedents establishing that a plaintiff cannot seek relief while refusing to provide discovery.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013385.jpg
This page from a legal filing (page 16) argues that attorney Edwards was entitled to seek discovery regarding Jeffrey Epstein's friends and past abuse to support claims for punitive damages, characterizing Epstein as a 'predatory pedophile' who assaulted 'dozens and dozens of minor girls.' The document further argues that Epstein's own lawsuit should be dismissed because he has refused to participate in discovery, instead invoking the Fifth Amendment when questioned.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013384.jpg
This page from a legal filing (likely by attorney Brad Edwards) argues that discovery efforts targeting Jeffrey Epstein's friends were necessary and valid. It highlights that Epstein and his household staff—who helped recruit minor girls—pleaded the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering questions about activities at the West Palm Beach mansion. The document asserts that evidence of other sexual abuse is admissible to prove modus operandi or motive.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013379.jpg
This page from a legal filing argues against Jeffrey Epstein's claims that attorney Edwards was involved in a Ponzi scheme or 'pumped' cases to investors. The text defends Edwards' actions as ethical legal advocacy, notes that the lawsuits were filed in 2008 before Edwards knew Scott Rothstein, and highlights that Epstein paid significant settlements in these cases. A footnote mentions that Epstein filed a retaliatory bar complaint against Edwards which was dismissed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013377.jpg
This page is from a legal filing arguing for summary judgment in favor of a defendant named Edwards against allegations made by Epstein. The text argues that Epstein's claim of negligence—specifically that Edwards 'should have known' about a Ponzi scheme run by his law partner Scott Rothstein—is legally deficient and lacks necessary elements like duty and causation. The document cites Florida case law to support the argument that Edwards cannot be held liable for failing to anticipate Rothstein's criminal deception.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Paid | Edwards | Epstein | $0.00 | Epstein is attempting to force Edwards to pay '... | View |
Second Amended Complaint
Allegations that Edwards 'should have known' about the Ponzi scheme.
Interview
Edwards did not respond to OPR's request to interview him.
Plea hearing notification
Villafaña told Edwards the hearing was 'important' but did not disclose the global resolution.
Notice of possible deposition
Legal notice
Deposition of David Copperfield
Notice of intent to take deposition.
Counterclaim
For malicious prosecution.
Requests for admissions, production, and interrogatories ...
Standard discovery requests regarding sexual abuse of minor girls.
Case status
Villafaña spoke to Edwards but did not inform him specifically of the signed NPA.
Motion for Contempt
Details harassment events in Jane Doe v. Epstein
Deposition Notices
Notices regarding depositions of Mattola and Copperfield.
Case transfer
Comments on fresh eyes reviewing the case and adversarial posture with Miami office
Investigation status/concerns
Edwards shared 'information and concerns' and asked 'very specific questions about what stage the investigation was in'. Villafaña responded she could not answer and gave the impression of an 'on-going active investigation'.
Maxwell's Deposition
Informed Edwards that Maxwell's mother was deathly ill and she was flying to England.
Cancellation of Deposition
Informed Edwards that Maxwell's mother was deathly ill and Maxwell was flying to England with no intention of returning to the US.
Brunel's location
Claimed Brunel had left the country and was back in France with no plans to return (later proven false).
Delay deposition
Request to delay Brunel's deposition date.
State Plea
Informed Edwards about state plea but omitted NPA details.
Case Status on behalf of Wild
In mid-June 2008, Edwards contacted Villafaña on Wild's behalf and was told the case was under investigation, with no mention of the NPA.
Complaints against Epstein
First filing of complaints containing allegations against Epstein.
N/A
Villafaña spoke to Edwards on the telephone but did not inform him specifically of the signed NPA.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity