BRAD EDWARDS
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
14
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Jane Doe
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Client |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Virginia Giuffre
|
Client |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Courtney Wild
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
the witness
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Three young women
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
AK
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
witness
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Witnesses who testified
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
victims
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jack Scarola
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Several young women (victims)
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Virginia Roberts
|
Previous communication |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE DOE NO. 1
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jack Scarola
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
E.W.
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. SCAROLA
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
witness
|
Acquaintance |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Questioner (Q)
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Professional |
5
|
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 |
EFTA00013570.pdf
This document is a legal response filed on August 1, 2008, by victims of Jeffrey Epstein (Jane Doe #1 and #2) against the United States Government. The victims allege violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically that the government entered into a secret Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Epstein in September 2007 without conferring with them and actively misled them into believing a federal investigation was ongoing. The filing requests the court to order the production of the NPA and an FBI interview report, and to schedule a hearing to determine remedies for the violation of the victims' rights.
EFTA00011364.pdf
This document is a forwarded email thread dated March 23, 2020. The content involves the circulation of a legal document titled 'doc 001 Doe vs Epstein estate complaint.pdf'. The original sender is Brad Edwards, a lawyer associated with Epstein victim representation, sending the file to a redacted recipient.
EFTA00010334.pdf
This document contains an email chain between the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) and attorneys Brad Edwards and Brittany Henderson of Edwards Pottinger LLC. The correspondence, dating between September 2019 and January 2020, concerns the transfer of evidence—specifically emails and 'photo booth' style photographs—related to a witness who had encounters with Jeffrey Epstein. The prosecutor mentions needing the photos to attach to an FBI '302' interview report.
EFTA00004231.pdf
This document is an FBI evidence receipt (FD-340) dated July 17, 2020. It records the receipt of a USB drive containing photographs provided by attorney Brad Edwards to the FBI's New York Office. The specific source of the photographs (after 'from') and the receiving agent's name are redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00030279.tif
This document is a page from a court filing, Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM, dated September 17, 2009, listing multiple attorneys and their respective law firms, contact information, and the specific related cases they represent plaintiffs in. It details legal counsel for various plaintiffs, including 'Jane Doe' and 'C.M.A.', across several related case numbers, providing contact details for each attorney and their firm.
DOJ-OGR-00022698.tif
This document is an excerpt from a legal transcript, likely a deposition, focusing on the origins and discovery of an 'Epstein list'. Ghislaine Maxwell is being questioned about her awareness of the list and the timeline of events, including Brad Edwards' involvement, Alfredo Rodriguez providing evidence, and Ted Waitt being asked for $10 million to keep Maxwell out of Epstein's civil suits in 2009. The document also touches upon Epstein's non-prosecution agreement in 2007-2008 and the subsequent prosecution of Rothstein and Alfredo Rodriguez.
DOJ-OGR-00022564.tif
This document is a page from a transcript, likely a deposition, involving Ghislaine Maxwell and Todd Blanche. They discuss the origin and transformation of information, potentially a list, from a civil case and personal computer, into a book and a combination list associated with Epstein and the Southern District of New York. Maxwell denies having seen a specific list and states that the 'story' is controlled by five people, with four alleged victims speaking about a list, blackmail, and other issues, involving lawyers and prosecutors in the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00022563.tif
This document is an excerpt from a transcript where Ghislaine Maxwell discusses a list of masseuses, a blackmail involving Ted Waitt and Rothstein's firm, and the alleged possession of documents and a book by Alfredo Rodriguez related to Brad Edwards and Epstein. She claims no knowledge of civil suits concerning the list of masseuses and notes a 'metamorphosis' of this list over time.
DOJ-OGR-00022561.tif
This document details events related to the Epstein case, including a $10 million request to Ted Waitt to keep someone out of civil suits and the signing of a non-prosecution agreement by Epstein in 2007. It also mentions Villafana as the lead prosecutor and Brad Edwards filing the CVRA case.
DOJ-OGR-00022560.tif
This document, likely a legal transcript, details events surrounding Brad Edwards, Alfredo Rodriguez, and an individual named Rothstein. It describes Alfredo Rodriguez being deposed twice and informing Brad Edwards about handwritten notes, followed by Brad Edwards providing a list to the FBI in October. Subsequently, Rothstein's firm was raided, and he was prosecuted for RICO, admitting to creating fake settlements.
DOJ-OGR-00022559.tif
This document excerpt details information from 2009 where Brad Edwards came across evidence, a list belonging to Epstein, identifying clients, victims, underage girls, and therapists. The document mentions a sting operation that obtained this 'list' from Epstein's former butler, Alfredo Rodriguez, who was later prosecuted for weapon possession. This list and Rodriguez's depositions became evidence in Epstein's civil suit, and Brad Edwards became aware of the list through an FBI criminal complaint.
DOJ-OGR-00023271.tif
This document excerpt details discussions and concerns surrounding victim notification and the handling of Jeffrey Epstein's case. Key figures like Sloman, Villafaña, and Acosta provided accounts to OPR regarding the federal plea process, communication between federal and state authorities, and the challenges of victim identification and notification, including a potential $150,000 payment for victims. The text also highlights discrepancies in victim counts and the impact of Epstein's defense team on inter-agency communications.
DOJ-OGR-00018153.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi (likely Juan Alessi) by Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on Alessi's previous testimony in 2016, conducted in Fort Lauderdale by Brad Edwards (Virginia Roberts' lawyer), regarding a person named 'Jane' and events in 1994 or 1995. Alessi claims in the current testimony that he may have confused 'two girls' during that previous deposition.
DOJ-OGR-00015109.jpg
A legal letter dated August 5, 2025, from Edwards Henderson (The Crime Victim Law Firm) addressed to Judge Engelmayer and the SDNY Victim and Witness Coordinator regarding the case USA v Maxwell. The firm represents numerous survivors of Epstein and Maxwell and writes to address the DOJ's request to unseal grand jury materials, urging the court to protect victims' rights under the CVRA (18 U.S.C. § 3771). The document emphasizes the victims' reliance on the justice system and argues that their rights to be protected from the accused must be considered regarding any disclosures.
DOJ-OGR-00008383.jpg
This document is a letter from the U.S. Government to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated December 15, 2021, regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Government is requesting permission to redact portions of the defendant's motion seeking testimony from Jack Scarola, Brad Edwards, and Robert Glassman to protect the privacy of a Minor Victim.
DOJ-OGR-00008381.jpg
This legal document presents an argument to the Court to preclude the testimony of Jack Scarola, Brad Edwards, and Robert Glassman. The core argument is that Glassman's settlement negotiations with an entity called EVCP cannot be used to impeach a witness named Jane, because she testified she was unaware of these negotiations. Allowing this testimony would be improper impeachment and more prejudicial than probative.
DOJ-OGR-00008379.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues against the defendant's proposal to call Brad Edwards, counsel for a witness named Kate, to testify. The filing asserts that Edwards' testimony about providing a U-Visa application for Kate is irrelevant for impeachment because it is consistent with Kate's own testimony and does not constitute 'powerful evidence of motive of bias' as the defense claims.
DOJ-OGR-00008376.jpg
This document is page 3 of a court filing (Document 545) in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 15, 2021. The text argues against the defendant's motion to call three attorneys for victims (Jack Scarola, Brad Edwards, and Robert Glassman) as witnesses, stating such testimony would be irrelevant, duplicative, or improper impeachment. Specifically regarding Jack Scarola, the document notes he represented victim 'Carolyn' in a 2008 lawsuit and before the Epstein Victims Compensation Program, facts which Carolyn already admitted during cross-examination.
DOJ-OGR-00008369.jpg
This legal document, filed on December 14, 2021, argues for the questioning of attorney Brad Edwards regarding a U-Visa application he submitted for his client, Kate. The filing asserts that Kate denied seeking a U-Visa during cross-examination, making her attorney's actions relevant to her motive and bias as a witness. The document contends that this action is not protected by attorney-client privilege, or if it was, the privilege was waived.
DOJ-OGR-00008364.jpg
A letter dated December 13, 2021, from defense attorney Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter informs the court of the defense's intention to question attorneys Jack Scarola, Brad Edwards, and Robert Glassman and argues that these questions do not violate attorney-client privilege. The document cites legal precedents regarding the burden of proof for privilege claims.
DOJ-OGR-00008284.jpg
This document is an appearances page from a legal filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 9, 2021. It lists the names, roles, and affiliations of the attorneys and a paralegal representing the Plaintiff, and the attorneys representing the Defendant. A videographer is also noted as being present for the proceedings.
DOJ-OGR-00000794.jpg
This document is page 11 of a court filing (Document 32) dated July 18, 2019, regarding the detention of Jeffrey Epstein. It details testimony from victim Courtney Wild, who requested Epstein remain in detention for public safety, and discusses the court's concern that Epstein poses an uncontrollable threat to young girls. The text contrasts the prosecution/court's view of Epstein's 'addictive sexual nature' with Defense Counsel's arguments that Epstein was disciplined and not an 'out-of-control rapist.'
DOJ-OGR-00000583.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a court hearing filed on July 24, 2019 (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). It features testimony from Ms. Farmer confirming Jeffrey Epstein's inappropriate conduct toward her. Subsequently, attorney Brad Edwards introduces his client, Courtney Wild, identifying her as the 'Jane Doe' in a 2008 civil lawsuit against the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act connected to Epstein's non-prosecution agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00000491.jpg
This legal document, filed on July 18, 2019, details Jeffrey Epstein's alleged failure to comply with his sex offender registration obligations in New York, citing a New York Post report. It also references recent news articles that claim Epstein engaged in sexual conduct with female visitors while on work release during a previous sentence in Florida, a claim disputed by the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office. The document uses these points to undermine the defense's argument that Epstein's supposed "perfect compliance" should lead to his release.
| 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 |
U-Visa Application
Brad Edwards provided a U-Visa application to the government on behalf of Kate during a proffer session.
U-Visa Application
Brad Edwards provided a U-Visa application to the government on behalf of Kate during a proffer session.
Information regarding abuse/Dershowitz
Jane Doe No. 3 provided information related to the subject of abuse by Dershowitz.
Epstein case status
"Hey, Brad how are you? How is the Epstein stuff going?"
TV Interviews
Urging people to watch Virginia Roberts' interview scheduled on three TV programs.
Congratulations
Congratulating Brad on the Deutsche Bank win and asking about the settlement figure and the JP Morgan lawsuit.
Cases
Edwards denies participating in any communications with investors or 'pumping' cases.
Reporting abuse by Ghislaine Maxwell
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.
[EXTERNAL] Trial
Discussing an Order, next steps, and potential travel/scope of testimony for a witness.
doc 001 Doe vs Epstein estate complaint.pdf
Original email sending a PDF attachment of a legal complaint.
Re: [Redacted]
Following up on document request; specifically asking for photographs of the witness.
RE: [Redacted]
We will send you all of the emails we have.
N/A (Body of email shown)
Legal outreach requesting cooperation and truthful testimony regarding events on Little St. James and recruitment by Ghislaine Maxwell.
Questioning regarding Jane and dates
Alessi was questioned by Brad Edwards in Fort Lauderdale.
Resolution of matter regarding a tape
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
Voicemail left in the morning, likely regarding the Rothstein firm complaint.
Deposition of Larry Visoski
Questioning regarding Visoski's knowledge of Epstein's activities and belief in allegations.
Deposition of Larry Eugene Morrison
Questioning regarding Morrison's knowledge of Epstein's activities and willingness to leave his daughter with Epstein.
Reporting evidence related to Epstein
Brad Edwards allegedly called the FBI to report evidence, including the 'Epstein list'.
Notice of Taking Videotaped Deposition
Service of notice via U.S. Mail and email transmission (exact date in August illegible, likely mid-August)
RE: Draft Protective Order
Discussing the proposed protective order, specifically objecting to paragraph C regarding client acknowledgement requirements.
Draft Protective Order
Sending draft protective order regarding disclosure of non-prosecution agreement to Edwards and Jane Does 1 and 2.
Stipulation of facts regarding Epstein case
Edwards proposes adding facts about the secret NPA to the court notice and demands a copy of the agreement.
Change of course regarding undisputed facts
Referenced in the opening paragraph.
Response to Proposed Facts
Response to proposed facts and request for NPA and interview report.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity