| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Questioner (Q)
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
AK
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Three young women
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane Doe #1
|
Client |
4
|
4 | |
|
person
Brittany Henderson
|
Business associate |
3
|
3 | |
|
person
Assistant United States Attorney
|
Legal representative |
3
|
3 | |
|
person
Epstein victims
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 | |
|
organization
[REDACTED]
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Paul Cassell
|
Co counsel |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN
|
Business associate |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
FBI
|
Informant contact |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
plaintiff
|
Counsel for plaintiff |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Accuser investigator |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
ALFREDO RODRIGUEZ
|
Source of information indirect |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
FBI
|
Cooperating party |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
ALFREDO RODRIGUEZ
|
Source of evidence cooperating witness |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
ALFREDO RODRIGUEZ
|
Connected via documents statements |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Paul Cassell
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafana
|
Collaborated on story |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
plaintiff
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Sharon Churcher
|
Collaborated on story |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
David Boies, Sigrid McCawley, Declarant
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
PAUL G. CASSELL
|
Professional co counsel |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jack Scarola
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Meeting | A meeting where Kate asked the Government to look into sponsoring her for a U-Visa. Brad Edwards ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein filed a lawsuit against the affiant, Brad Edwards, and Scott Rothstein alleging conspirac... | Court (implied) | View |
| N/A | Proffer session | Brad Edwards provided a U-Visa application to the government on behalf of Kate. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal consultation | Kate reached out to attorney Brad Edwards to report the abuse she suffered. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A trial that the author indicates might not have happened without her attorneys. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | New court filing submitted asking for Jane Doe #3 and another woman to join a pending case. | West Palm Beach, Fla. | View |
| N/A | N/A | Questioning of Attorneys Jack Scarola, Brad Edwards, and Robert Glassman by the defense. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Fundraisers and parties at witness's home | Witness's Home | View |
| N/A | N/A | Start of Brad Edwards' investigation. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Win/Settlement with Deutsche Bank | Legal Court/Settlement | View |
| N/A | N/A | Meeting and Contacts with Peter Skinner, Stan Pottinger, and Brad Edwards by AUSA [REDACTED]. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of Florida Defamation Action (Case No. CACE 15-000072). | Broward County Circuit Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Lawsuit brought by Epstein against Brad Edwards. | Florida | View |
| 2025-10-01 | N/A | Brad Edwards called the FBI. | N/A | View |
| 2025-08-01 | N/A | Alfredo Rodriguez's second deposition. | N/A | View |
| 2025-07-01 | N/A | Alfredo Rodriguez's first deposition. | N/A | View |
| 2025-07-01 | N/A | Alfredo Rodriguez's first deposition where he mentioned handwritten notes/journal. | N/A | View |
| 2025-07-01 | N/A | Brad Edwards had access to 'the list'. | N/A | View |
| 2021-12-09 | Legal proceeding appearances | Listing of appearances by legal counsel and other personnel for the Plaintiff and Defendant in ca... | N/A | View |
| 2021-11-20 | N/A | Discussion regarding trial order and witness testimony logistics. | N/A | View |
| 2021-04-23 | N/A | Plea Hearing | SDNY Court | View |
| 2020-07-17 | N/A | FBI received a USB drive containing photographs from Brad Edwards. | New York Office | View |
| 2020-06-12 | N/A | Filing of Joint Stipulation and Proposed Order Staying Action | New York, New York | View |
| 2020-06-12 | N/A | Joint Stipulation dated by counsel | New York, New York | View |
| 2020-02-06 | N/A | Filing of Joint Proposed Discovery Schedule | New York, New York | View |
This document contains a letter from Troutman Sanders LLP to Judge Debra C. Freeman updating the court on the establishment of the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program. It attaches a Status Report filed in the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands and the detailed Protocol for the Independent Epstein Victims' Compensation Program, which outlines eligibility, claims administration, evaluation methodology, and compensation procedures for sexual abuse victims of Jeffrey Epstein.
This document is a Joint Proposed Discovery Schedule filed on February 6, 2020, in the Southern District of New York case 'Anastasia Doe v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn'. It outlines the timeline and procedural rules for the discovery phase of the lawsuit against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein, including deadlines for initial disclosures, document requests, and expert discovery.
This document is a legal notice filed on June 14, 2010, in the case of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein. The notice, filed by attorney Spencer T. Kuvin on behalf of Plaintiff C.L., withdraws a subpoena and cancels the deposition of Maritza Milagros Vasquez, which was scheduled for the following day, June 15, 2010. The document also includes a certificate of service listing legal counsel for various parties involved in related cases.
This document is a legal response filed on November 28, 2009, by Plaintiff Carolyn M. Andriano (Jane Doe No. 2) in her civil case against Jeffrey Epstein. The filing opposes a motion by third-party witness Igor Zinoview—Epstein's driver, bodyguard, and trainer since November 2005—who sought to avoid being deposed by claiming he had no knowledge of relevant facts. The Plaintiff argues that Zinoview must be deposed because he worked for Epstein during the active Palm Beach Police investigation (2005-2006) and likely possesses knowledge regarding activities at the Epstein residence, especially since Epstein himself invoked the Fifth Amendment.
A 2009 legal motion filed in the Southern District of Florida on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein requesting permission to attend mediation in a case involving Carolyn Andriano (C.M.A.). The motion notes that a prior 'no contact order' exists regarding Andriano, but states that neither she nor her counsel object to Epstein's presence at depositions, mediation, or trial. The document includes a comprehensive service list of attorneys involved in multiple related cases against Epstein.
This document is a legal motion filed on November 9, 2009, by Igor Zinoviev, a third-party witness and employee of Jeffrey Epstein, seeking a protective order to prevent or limit his deposition in the civil case 'Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein'. Zinoviev claims he has no relevant information for the civil cases as his employment with Epstein began in November 2005, after the period of the alleged misconduct, and he has not discussed Epstein's criminal or civil cases with him.
This document is a Notice of Compliance filed by Jeffrey Epstein's legal team (Burman, Critton, Luttier & Coleman) on July 28, 2009, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. It addresses a court order regarding the preservation of evidence and a protective order, noting that while the parties agreed on many sections, they could not finalize a joint order, leading Epstein to submit his own proposed order separately. The document lists numerous related civil cases involving Jane Doe plaintiffs and provides a comprehensive service list of attorneys involved in the various Epstein-related litigations at that time, including Bruce Reinhart representing Sarah Kellen.
This document is a legal reply filed on June 4, 2009, by Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and 102 in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiffs are requesting a court order prohibiting Jeffrey Epstein and his agents from contacting them directly or indirectly, citing his status as a convicted sex offender and their fear of intimidation. The document also includes a service list detailing the legal representation for various parties, including Bruce E. Reinhart representing co-defendant Sarah Kellen.
This document is a Motion for Leave to File Under Seal submitted on May 29, 2009, by attorneys for Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and 102 in the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiffs request permission to file their response to Epstein's Motion to Stay under seal, or alternatively, request the court to unseal the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) so they can adequately respond. The document includes a comprehensive service list detailing attorneys representing Epstein, co-defendant Sarah Kellen (represented by Bruce Reinhart), and various other Jane Doe plaintiffs.
This document is a legal reply filed on May 29, 2009, by Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and 102 in the Southern District of Florida, arguing for the right to proceed anonymously in their lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein. The plaintiffs contend that Epstein aims to reveal their identities to harass and intimidate them, and they cite various legal precedents and the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) to support their request for privacy due to the sexual nature of the crimes committed against them as minors. The document also includes a service list detailing the attorneys representing various parties in related cases against Epstein.
This document is a Notice of Withdrawing Subpoena filed on June 14, 2010, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Plaintiff C.L., represented by attorney Spencer T. Kuvin, withdrew a subpoena and cancelled the deposition of Maritza Milagros Vasquez, which had been scheduled for June 15, 2010. The document includes a certificate of service listing legal counsel for various parties involved in the primary case (Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein) and related cases.
This document is a Notice of Taking Videotaped Deposition and an associated Subpoena filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 08-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON). Plaintiff Jane Doe, represented by attorney Brad Edwards of Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, commanded Jean Luc Bruhel to appear for a deposition on September 22, 2009, in New York City. The document contains the legal notice, the subpoena addressed to Bruhel at a New York address, and standard Federal Rules of Civil Procedure regarding subpoenas.
This document is a legal response filed by Plaintiff Carolyn M. Andriano (Jane Doe No. 2) opposing a motion by third-party witness Igor Zinoview to avoid deposition. Zinoview, who worked as Epstein's driver, bodyguard, and trainer starting in November 2005, claimed he had no relevant knowledge of Epstein's legal matters. The Plaintiff argues that Zinoview worked for Epstein during the police investigation period and likely has relevant observations, regardless of whether he discussed legal matters with Epstein.
Legal filing from November 2009 in the case of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein's attorneys reply to a response regarding the preservation of evidence held by the law firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler (RRA), which was undergoing restructuring. The document notes that the Department of Justice had seized approximately 40 boxes of documents from RRA, including 13 boxes related to the Epstein case, and alludes to serious ethical and criminal issues involving the RRA firm that could impact the validity of the cases against Epstein.
This document is a legal motion filed on November 9, 2009, by third-party witness Igor Zinoviev, seeking a protective order to prevent or limit his deposition in the case of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein. Zinoviev, a driver and bodyguard for Epstein since November 2005, claims he has no relevant information regarding Epstein's criminal or civil cases, particularly concerning events prior to September 2005. The motion cites legal precedents regarding the scope of discovery and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 26(c) to argue against the deposition.
This document is an agreed motion filed on May 13, 2010, in the Southern District of Florida by Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 103 against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein. The plaintiff requests a one-week extension to file a response to Epstein's motion to dismiss because the parties are in the process of resolving the matter via settlement, which would render the motion moot. The document includes a comprehensive service list detailing legal counsel for Epstein, Co-Defendant Sarah Kellen (represented by Bruce Reinhart), and plaintiffs in several related cases.
This document is an agreed motion for an extension of time filed on April 22, 2010, in the case of Jane Doe No. 103 vs. Jeffrey Epstein (Case No. 10-80309-WJZ). Plaintiff's counsel, Katherine W. Ezell, requests an extension until May 13, 2010, to file a response to Epstein's motion to dismiss because she is leaving for a vacation in Italy the following day. The motion notes that Epstein's counsel, Robert Critton, agrees to the extension, and the document includes a service list of attorneys involved in this and related cases.
This document is a Motion to Transfer filed on April 1, 2010, by Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 103 in the US District Court, Southern District of Florida. The plaintiff seeks to transfer her case against Jeffrey Epstein to Judge Marra's division to consolidate it with other similar pending cases, specifically 'Jane Doe No. 2 vs. Jeffrey Epstein'. The document includes a service list detailing legal counsel for Epstein, co-defendant Sarah Kellen (represented by Bruce Reinhart), and plaintiffs in several related cases.
This document is a motion filed on November 20, 2009, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida, requesting permission for Jeffrey Epstein to attend mediation in the case involving Carolyn Andriano (C.M.A.). The motion notes that a previous no-contact order exists regarding Andriano, but her counsel has no objection to Epstein attending the deposition, mediation, or trial. The document includes a service list detailing the attorneys involved in this and related cases, including Bruce Reinhart representing Sarah Kellen.
This document is a legal reply filed by Jeffrey Epstein's legal team on November 16, 2009, regarding the preservation of evidence held by the law firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler (RRA). The filing notes that the Department of Justice seized approximately 40 boxes of documents from RRA, including 13 boxes specifically related to Epstein cases. The document highlights scheduling conflicts involving the deposition of Herbert Stettin (RRA's Chief Restructuring Officer) and alludes to potential ethical or criminal issues within RRA that could impact the validity of the cases against Epstein.
This document is a Motion for Protective Order filed on November 9, 2009, by Igor Zinoviev, a third-party witness and Jeffrey Epstein's driver/bodyguard since November 2005. Zinoviev seeks to prevent or limit his deposition, arguing he has no knowledge relevant to the civil cases as his employment with Epstein began after the alleged events, and he has not discussed Epstein's criminal or civil cases with him. The motion cites legal precedents on the scope of discovery and includes a list of attorneys involved in various related cases.
This document is a legal motion filed on May 29, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida by Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and 102 against Jeffrey Epstein. The plaintiffs request leave to file their response to Epstein's motion to stay under seal because it references the confidential Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), or alternatively, to unseal the NPA. The document includes a comprehensive service list detailing the legal representation for Epstein (including Robert Critton and Jack Goldberger), Sarah Kellen (represented by Bruce Reinhart), and numerous other Jane Doe plaintiffs.
This document is a legal reply brief filed on May 29, 2009, by Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and 102 in the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiffs seek to proceed anonymously in their lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein, arguing that revealing their identities would subject them to harassment, shame, and further trauma, particularly given their status as victims of sexual exploitation as minors. The filing also discusses the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), statutory minimum damages under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and accuses Epstein of using the threat of publicity to intimidate victims into settling.
This document is a Motion for an Order for the Preservation of Evidence filed by Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and 102 against Jeffrey Epstein in May 2009. The motion requests the court to order Epstein to preserve evidence related to allegations of sexual abuse, specifically citing evidence seized during a 2005 police search and other electronic/physical records located across his six international properties. The document lists numerous attorneys involved in related cases and references Epstein's previous guilty plea in 2008.
This document is a response filed by Plaintiff Carolyn M. Andriano on November 28, 2009, opposing a motion by third-party witness Igor Zinoview to prevent his deposition. Zinoview, who worked as Epstein's driver, bodyguard, and trainer starting in November 2005, claims he has no relevant knowledge of legal matters involving Epstein. The Plaintiff argues that because Zinoview worked for Epstein during the active police investigation (2005-2006), he likely possesses relevant information regarding activities at the Epstein residence, and that a complete bar on his deposition is legally unjustified.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | Firm/Ponzi Scheme | BRAD EDWARDS | $0.00 | Potential bonuses discussed regarding work on c... | View |
Edwards denies participating in any communications with investors or 'pumping' cases.
Kate reached out to attorney Brad Edwards when her daughter was 1 or 2 to tell him the full extent of the manipulation and abuse instigated by Ghislaine Maxwell.
Brad Edwards provided a U-Visa application to the government on behalf of Kate during a proffer session.
Brad Edwards provided a U-Visa application to the government on behalf of Kate during a proffer session.
Jane Doe No. 3 provided information related to the subject of abuse by Dershowitz.
"Hey, Brad how are you? How is the Epstein stuff going?"
Urging people to watch Virginia Roberts' interview scheduled on three TV programs.
Congratulating Brad on the Deutsche Bank win and asking about the settlement figure and the JP Morgan lawsuit.
Discussing an Order, next steps, and potential travel/scope of testimony for a witness.
Original email sending a PDF attachment of a legal complaint.
Following up on document request; specifically asking for photographs of the witness.
We will send you all of the emails we have.
Legal outreach requesting cooperation and truthful testimony regarding events on Little St. James and recruitment by Ghislaine Maxwell.
Alessi was questioned by Brad Edwards in Fort Lauderdale.
Edwards explained the legal necessity of the tape for the Jane Doe case; Carroll warned that Mr. Rush's disclosure was a 'stupid move' putting his job at risk.
Voicemail left in the morning, likely regarding the Rothstein firm complaint.
Questioning regarding Visoski's knowledge of Epstein's activities and belief in allegations.
Questioning regarding Morrison's knowledge of Epstein's activities and willingness to leave his daughter with Epstein.
Brad Edwards allegedly called the FBI to report evidence, including the 'Epstein list'.
Service of notice via U.S. Mail and email transmission (exact date in August illegible, likely mid-August)
Sending draft protective order regarding disclosure of non-prosecution agreement to Edwards and Jane Does 1 and 2.
Discussing the proposed protective order, specifically objecting to paragraph C regarding client acknowledgement requirements.
Edwards proposes adding facts about the secret NPA to the court notice and demands a copy of the agreement.
Referenced in the opening paragraph.
Discusses stipulation of facts, requests plea agreement copies, disputes government narrative regarding victim notification.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity