Judge Marra
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
prosecutors from the Southern District of Florida
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
THE WITNESS
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lee
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Judicial |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Judge Marra denied Ms. Giuffre's motion to join the case but allowed her participation as a witness. | Federal Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of RICO claim | Federal Court | View |
| N/A | Litigation | Extensive litigation occurred before Judge Marra regarding the failure of prosecutors to notify v... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal rulings by Judge Marra regarding the case status. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Marra issues opinion that prosecutors violated the CVRA. | Federal Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Marra issued orders to show cause why default judgments shouldn't be entered. | Federal Court | View |
| 2019-07-23 | N/A | Filing by Jane Doe 1 and 2 in the Florida CVRA case. | Florida | View |
| 2019-02-21 | N/A | Summary Judgment Order entered by Judge Marra finding the Government violated the CVRA. | SD Florida Court | View |
| 2016-02-21 | N/A | Summary Judgment Order issued by Judge Marra describing Epstein's trafficking operation. | United States District Court | View |
| 2015-01-23 | N/A | Expected ruling by Judge Marra. | Court | View |
| 2010-06-25 | N/A | Court order affirming magistrate judge's discovery orders. | Court | View |
| 2010-04-01 | N/A | Court Order Granting Motion to Transfer | Miami, Florida | View |
| 2009-06-12 | N/A | Court appearance before Judge Marra to address if Epstein's defense breaches the Non-Prosecution ... | Court | View |
| 2009-05-14 | N/A | Judge Marra entered an Order Consolidating Cases for discovery and procedural motions. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2009-03-25 | N/A | Judge Marra enters Order on Plaintiffs' Motion to Seize Further Assets. | West Palm Beach, FL | View |
| 2009-03-17 | N/A | Court hearings regarding motion to seize assets. | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2008-08-14 | N/A | Hearing with Judge Marra | Court (implied) | View |
| 2008-07-11 | N/A | Hearing held before Judge Marra on the Crime Victims' Rights Act action where the plea agreement ... | N/A | View |
| 2008-07-11 | N/A | Hearing regarding Crime Victims' Rights Act where the non-prosecution agreement was described. | Court of Judge Marra | View |
| 2008-07-11 | N/A | Hearing before Judge Marra where the non-prosecution agreement was described. | Court | View |
| 2007-09-18 | N/A | Hearing regarding Epstein's Computer Equipment (date inferred as 'a week from today' relative to ... | West Palm Beach (implied by... | View |
| 2007-09-18 | N/A | Hearing on Epstein Motion to Quash | Judge Marra | View |
| 2007-09-12 | N/A | Proposed hearing on Epstein's motion to quash. | Southern District of Florid... | View |
| -2008-08-26 | N/A | Hearing on plaintiffs' motion in Jane Doe 1 and 2 v. United States. | Court | View |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010598.jpg
This document, likely a page from a House Oversight report, details the legal strategies employed by attorney Edwards against Jeffrey Epstein, specifically the use of flight logs to prove a federal nexus for sexual crimes. It discusses a complaint by 'Jane Doe No. 102' alleging the use of Epstein's plane for transporting minors as young as 12 for abuse by Epstein and his friends. Additionally, it references a Fall 2009 interview with the New York Daily News where Epstein denied wrongdoing and claimed civil suits were result of jealousy over his success.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015630.jpg
This document is page 10 of a legal response in the defamation case *Edwards v. Dershowitz* (CACE 15-000072). The filing argues against Dershowitz's motion for confidentiality, citing previous orders by Judge Marra in a federal CVRA case. The text explicitly mentions allegations of sexual abuse by Dershowitz against Ms. Giuffre and asserts that previous court orders allow for these factual details to be presented if properly supported.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015626.jpg
This document is a legal response in the case of Edwards, Bradley vs. Dershowitz (CACE 15-000072), arguing against the sealing of records based on Judge Marra's order. It details that Dershowitz's argument for confidentiality is a misunderstanding, and references a 2008 federal case (Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 v. United States) filed by Edwards and Cassell pro bono, on behalf of underage sex abuse victims of Jeffrey Epstein, where discovery requests were made in 2011 seeking information about Dershowitz and Prince Andrew.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015580.jpg
This document is an email thread from January 23, 2015, between Donna Paine, a freelance TV producer for ITN News, and attorneys Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards. Paine is requesting to be added to a media contact list in anticipation of a ruling by Judge Marra regarding the Jeffrey Epstein case and specific allegations made by Jane Doe #3 against Prince Andrew. Cassell confirms he will have his assistant, Joan, add Paine to their contacts list.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013473.jpg
This document is a legal declaration by an attorney representing victims of Jeffrey Epstein. It details the legal strategy regarding RICO and federal claims, specifically the importance of flight logs in establishing a federal nexus via interstate commerce for sexual abuse cases. It also mentions the attorney's departure from the RRA law firm following the exposure of Scott Rothstein's Ponzi scheme and the subsequent settlement of Epstein cases in July 2010.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013468.jpg
This document is an affidavit by attorney Bradley James Edwards detailing his representation of victims of Jeffrey Epstein in 2008. Edwards outlines his interactions with Assistant U.S. Attorney Marie Villafaña, alleging that the prosecution failed to inform him of a secret non-prosecution agreement and withheld evidence despite admitting to having proof of Epstein molesting at least 40 minors. The affidavit highlights the timeline of the plea deal and the subsequent revelation that federal prosecution would be blocked.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013363.jpg
This document is an affidavit by attorney Bradley James Edwards detailing his representation of three victims (L.M., E.W., and Jane Doe) against Jeffrey Epstein in 2008. Edwards describes his interactions with AUSA Marie Villafaña, alleging that the U.S. Attorney's Office withheld critical information regarding a plea agreement that blocked federal prosecution, despite admitting they had evidence of Epstein molesting at least 40 minors. The affidavit outlines the timeline of the plea deal revelation in June and July 2008.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013351.jpg
This document, page 33 of a House Oversight report, details legal strategies involving attorney Edwards and his client Jane Doe. It discusses the use of flight logs to prove a federal nexus of interstate commerce for sexual abuse to counter Epstein's summary judgment motion. The text highlights allegations from Jane Doe No. 102 regarding the abuse of minors as young as 12 and mentions a Fall 2009 interview where Epstein denied wrongdoing and showed no remorse.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013350.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing arguing that the discovery of pilot and flight logs was legally proper in civil cases against Jeffrey Epstein. It explains that this evidence was necessary to support a federal RICO claim depicting Epstein's operation as a criminal enterprise dependent on air travel, as well as to establish a 'federal nexus' for claims under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 regarding interstate commerce and telephone usage. The text documents the legal team's strategy despite Judge Marra's dismissal of the RICO claim.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013499.tif
This document details legal proceedings and events related to Jeffrey Epstein and Scott Rothstein. It describes Jane Doe's RICO and federal claims against Epstein, emphasizing the role of flight logs as evidence of interstate commerce to establish a 'federal nexus' for sexual assaults. It also mentions the affiant's involvement in the Rothstein Ponzi scheme as a victim and their role in reaching settlements in Epstein-related lawsuits.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013494.tif
This affidavit by attorney Bradley James Edwards details his representation of victims of Jeffrey Epstein in 2008, including the filing of state and federal lawsuits. It highlights his interactions with Assistant U.S. Attorney Marie Villafaña regarding Epstein's plea agreement and concerns that information about the federal prosecution implications of the state plea was not fully disclosed to his clients.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021878.jpg
Page 55 of a rough draft deposition transcript stamped by House Oversight. Attorney Mr. Simpson questions a witness about what they would have told a judge (specifically Judge Marra). The witness, likely an attorney themselves, objects that the question is speculative and involves attorney-client privilege, but asserts they would have provided an 'ample factual basis for those allegations.' Professor Cassell is mentioned in an objection regarding expert witnesses.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021871.jpg
This document is page 48 of a rough draft transcript, likely from a deposition or hearing related to House Oversight investigations. A speaker explains to the record that the current legal action is ancillary to a contemplated criminal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein and four women who assisted him in international sex trafficking. The speaker discusses Judge Marra's rulings over the past seven years, noting the case has proceeded under civil procedural rules despite the criminal nature of the underlying allegations. The questioning then pivots to allegations regarding 'other minors.'
DE 324
Order striking allegations but allowing Jane Doe 3 to reassert details; denied Giuffre's motion to join but allowed witness participation.
DE 325
Supplemental order stating victims may re-refile documents omitting stricken portions.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity