Jane Doe
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
19
Very Strong
|
15 | |
|
person
Bradley J. Edwards
|
Client |
17
Very Strong
|
12 | |
|
person
BRAD EDWARDS
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Edwards
|
Client |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Abuser victim |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Bradley James Edwards
|
Client |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MS. MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Jane Doe's Mother
|
Family |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Mr. Trump
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Perpetrator victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Plaintiff defendant |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Victim abuser |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Alleged abuser victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
THEODORE J. LEOPOLD
|
Client |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jane Doe's Father
|
Family |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Haley Robson
|
Plaintiff defendant |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
narrator
|
Client |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
DONALD J. TRUMP
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Robert S. Glassman
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Edwards
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Herman
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Sarah Kellen
|
Plaintiff defendant |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Victim abuser |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Lawsuit filed by Jeffrey Herman on behalf of Jane Doe, her father, and stepmother against Jeffrey... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jane Doe dropped her lawsuit against Epstein due to parental squabbling. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's molestation of Jane Doe and other minors. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Exhaustive attempts by Jane Doe and other plaintiffs to obtain discovery from Epstein, including ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Bradley James Edwards filed complaints against Jeffrey Epstein on behalf of two redacted clients ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sexual assault of three minor girls | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Bradley James Edwards filed state court actions on behalf of two redacted clients and a federal c... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Intimidation of Jane Doe | Jane Doe's home/Hiding place | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sexual assault of Jane Doe | Epstein's home (massage room) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sexual assault of Jane Doe involving massage and specific sexual acts. | Epstein’s mansion in Palm B... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of RICO claim | Federal Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jeffrey Epstein filed an answer to Jane Doe's complaint, invoking his Fifth Amendment right to si... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jeffrey Epstein took Jane Doe's deposition, asking questions suggesting she is fabricating allega... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of Complaint for sexual assault and abuse. | Palm Beach County, Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of state and federal court actions against Jeffrey Epstein. | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Civil action against Epstein represented by Edwards. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein sexually abused three clients of Edwards (L.M., E.W., and Jane Doe). | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein filed a summary judgment motion regarding federal nexus. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein settled the case before trial. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Acting classes | Herbert Berkoff Studios and... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Voice lessons | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Taking of photographs of minor Plaintiff without her knowledge | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Car trips for Doe driven by Decedent's drivers | Unknown | View |
| N/A | Alleged criminal activity | Defendants allegedly participated in an enterprise and a pattern of criminal activity, including ... | Florida | View |
| N/A | Recruitment and assault | Ms. Robson recruited Jane Doe and brought her to Epstein's mansion in Palm Beach. Jane Doe was in... | Epstein's mansion in Palm B... | View |
055.pdf
Scheduling Order issued by U.S. Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman on February 11, 2020, coordinating deadlines for multiple civil lawsuits against the Epstein Estate (Indyke et al.) and Nine East 71st Street. The order establishes deadlines for initial disclosures, document requests, fact discovery (June 10, 2020), and expert discovery (July 31, 2020), and notes ongoing settlement discussions with a status report due by April 30, 2020. The document lists 13 separate civil actions being managed together under this order.
053.pdf
Court order from the Southern District of New York dated January 14, 2020, coordinating pretrial supervision for multiple civil lawsuits filed by women alleging sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Debra Freeman orders the parties to submit a discovery schedule by February 6, 2020, and schedules a joint pretrial conference for February 11, 2020. The document lists thirteen specific cases involving plaintiffs such as Katlyn Doe, Priscilla Doe, and others against Indyke and other Epstein-related entities.
024.pdf
This document is a legal letter filed on October 16, 2019, by attorney Bradley J. Edwards to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It concerns the case 'VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al.' and serves to alert the court to a recent decision in a related Epstein case (Katlyn Doe v. Indyke) where Judge Castel allowed a plaintiff to proceed anonymously, supporting Edwards' client's similar motion.
017-19.pdf
Plaintiff Jane Doe filed an emergency motion to hold Jeffrey Epstein in contempt for failing to comply with discovery orders in a civil case (08-CV-80893). The motion alleges that Epstein failed to produce state criminal discovery materials and provided only heavily redacted correspondence with the U.S. Attorney's Office, obscuring the defense counsel's side of the communications. Doe seeks immediate production of unredacted documents, sanctions of $5,000 against Epstein's counsel, and a ruling that withheld materials be deemed admissible at trial.
017-18.pdf
This document is a page from a court docket covering filings on June 29 and 30, 2010, in the case of Jane Doe vs. Jeffrey Epstein (Case 9:10-cv-81111-WPD). Key entries include orders by Judge Kenneth A. Marra granting an open trial and identifying Jane Doe, as well as denying Epstein's request to redact tax records. It also lists motions by Epstein's defense regarding jury selection, sequestration, and a request to continue the trial, alongside Plaintiff's motion for a writ regarding witness Alfredo Rodriguez.
017-17.pdf
This document is a Motion for Protective Order filed on June 30, 2010, by Jeffrey Epstein's defense team in the civil case Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein seeks permission to redact specific portions of his tax returns regarding investment vehicles, claiming they contain trade secrets and confidential business information. The motion argues that Plaintiff's counsel, Brad Edwards, has a history of sharing discovery material with media and investigators, specifically citing an instance involving Alfredo Rodriguez's journal.
017-13.pdf
This document is a protective response filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe on May 27, 2010, in the Southern District of Florida case against Jeffrey Epstein. The plaintiff requests the court to promptly order the production of tax returns and other documents that Epstein has withheld on Fifth Amendment grounds, emphasizing that the trial date is set for July 19, 2010. The filing notes that negotiations with Epstein's counsel failed and lists numerous related cases and attorneys involved.
017-01.pdf
This document is a Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's First Request for Production filed by Jane Doe in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against Jeffrey Epstein. The plaintiff argues that Epstein's blanket invocation of Fifth Amendment privileges to refuse producing documents (such as phone records, tax returns, and correspondence) is improper and that he should be compelled to answer or provide a privilege log. The motion details specific discovery requests and Epstein's uniform response asserting his constitutional rights against self-incrimination.
016.pdf
This document is a Motion for a Protective Order filed by plaintiff M.J. on November 11, 2010, requesting the court bar Jeffrey Epstein from direct or indirect contact. The motion details a pattern of Epstein using private investigators to harass and intimidate victims and witnesses, specifically citing an incident on July 1, 2010, where a PI named Thaddeus Knowles followed 'Jane Doe' and flashed lights into her home. It also references Epstein's intimidation of other witnesses including Sarah Kellen, Leslie Groff, and Alfredo Rodriguez, and his history of violating no-contact orders.
016-06.pdf
This document is a court order dated July 1, 2010, from the Southern District of Florida in the case of Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Peter R. Palermo grants the plaintiff's motion to modify the scheduling of a settlement conference set for July 6, 2010, to ensure Jane Doe does not come into contact with Epstein, citing existing no-contact orders. The order stipulates specific arrival times for Epstein (8:30 AM), dismissal procedures, and explicitly forbids communication or harassment between the parties.
016-05.pdf
This document is a motion filed on June 30, 2010, by Plaintiff Jane Doe requesting the modification of a court order regarding an upcoming settlement conference with Jeffrey Epstein. Doe requests that Epstein be kept in a secure, separate room to prevent any contact or intimidation, citing his status as a convicted sex offender and previous incidents where he intimidated victims, specifically Jane Doe No. 4, during court proceedings. The motion references Epstein's 2008 guilty plea and strict no-contact orders issued by both state and federal courts.
015.pdf
This document is a Plaintiff's Response to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Quash Service of Process. The plaintiff, M.J., argues that service was properly effected on October 8, 2010, when a private investigator handed the papers to an employee named 'Mark' at Epstein's New York mansion. The filing accuses Epstein and his associate Richard Barnett of fraud and perjury for submitting an affidavit claiming service never occurred, and details a pattern of obstruction by Epstein and his associates (including Ghislaine Maxwell and Jean Luc Brunel) in similar civil cases.
020.pdf
This document is a Motion to Dismiss filed by Jeffrey Epstein's legal team on June 16, 2010, in the case of L.M. v. Epstein. Epstein's lawyers argue the case should be dismissed because the plaintiff failed to serve the complaint within the required 120 days (Rule 4(m)). Furthermore, the motion alleges that the complaint filed by L.M. (represented by Bradley Edwards) was used as a prop in Scott Rothstein's massive $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme to lure investors with fabricated settlement agreements. The document cites depositions where L.M. contradicts allegations made in her complaint regarding sexual acts and travel.
014.pdf
This document is a legal response filed on March 12, 2010, by attorney Tama Beth Kudman on behalf of non-party witness Jean Luc Bruhnel (likely Jean-Luc Brunel) in the civil case Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein. Bruhnel opposes the plaintiff's motion to compel his deposition, arguing that he is a French citizen who has left the United States and cannot be legally compelled to return for testimony. The filing claims the plaintiff's motion is frivolous, notes that previous deposition dates were canceled by agreement, and suggests the plaintiff should use the Hague Convention to secure testimony abroad.
014-01.pdf
This document is a Notice of Taking Videotaped Deposition and a Subpoena issued by the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida in the case of Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein. It commands Jean Luc Bruhel to appear for a deposition on September 22, 2009, at Esquire Court Reporters in New York City. The subpoena was issued by Brad Edwards, attorney for the plaintiff.
016.pdf
This document is a Scheduling Order from the US District Court (SDNY) dated February 11, 2020, issued by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman. It consolidates deadlines for discovery, expert reports, and status updates for thirteen related civil cases involving plaintiffs suing the Epstein estate executors (Indyke) and related entities. The order sets a fact discovery deadline of June 10, 2020, and mentions ongoing settlement discussions.
011.pdf
This document is a court order filed on January 14, 2020, by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman in the Southern District of New York. It coordinates the discovery schedules for multiple civil cases filed against the Jeffrey Epstein estate (represented by Indyke et al.) by various plaintiffs claiming sexual abuse. The order mandates the submission of discovery plans by February 6, 2020, and sets a joint pretrial conference for February 11, 2020.
052.pdf
This document is a legal stipulation filed on November 5, 2021, in the Southern District of New York, regarding case 1:20-cv-02365-LJL-DCF. The plaintiff, 'Jane Doe,' voluntarily dismisses her claims with prejudice against the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate, Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn. The dismissal is agreed upon by counsel for both parties without costs to either side.
049.pdf
This document is a legal letter dated September 10, 2021, filed by attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz of Troutman Pepper on behalf of the Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein (Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn). The letter is addressed to Judge Debra C. Freeman regarding the case 'Jane Doe v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn' (Case 1:20-cv-02365). The defense informs the court that they are working jointly with the Plaintiff to settle the matter out of court and requests a sixty-day stay of proceedings until November 9, 2021.
047.pdf
This document is a legal notice filed on September 6, 2021, in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:20-cv-02365-LJL-DCF). The defendants, Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn (executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate), represented by attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz, are moving to dismiss the complaint filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe with prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6).
046.pdf
This is a Notice of Filing of Official Transcript from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in the case of Jane Doe v. Darren K Indyke et al (Case No. 1:20-cv-02365-LJL-DCF). Court Reporter Carole Ludwig notifies the parties that a transcript of a Telephone Conference held on August 26, 2021, has been filed on September 3, 2021. The document outlines the standard legal procedures and timelines for the parties to request redactions of personal data identifiers from the transcript.
045.pdf
This document is a transcript of a telephone conference held on August 26, 2021, before Magistrate Judge Debra C. Freeman in the case of Jane Doe v. Darren K. Indyke et al. The proceedings cover case management matters, including setting a scheduling order for discovery, discussing a forthcoming motion to dismiss, and granting the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. The court also encourages the parties to engage in settlement discussions and outlines procedures for status reports.
044.pdf
A letter from attorney Bennet J. Moskowitz to Judge Debra C. Freeman dated August 26, 2021, regarding the case Jane Doe v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn. The letter requests the withdrawal of a previously filed Joint Proposed Discovery Schedule (ECF No. 40) because it contained incorrect signature and contact information for the Plaintiff's counsel.
042.pdf
This document is a court order from the Southern District of New York dated August 26, 2021, in the civil case of Jane Doe v. Indyke and Kahn. The order grants a motion for attorney Mary 'Molly' S. DiRago of Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP to appear pro hac vice as counsel for the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate. It is signed by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman.
034.pdf
This is a legal declaration filed on August 13, 2021, by Bennet J. Moskowitz, attorney for the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate (Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn). The document serves to introduce 15 exhibits (Exhibit A through Exhibit O) into the court record in support of the executors' statement regarding the plaintiff's application to proceed anonymously. The nature and content of these exhibits are completely redacted in this document, and a separate page indicates the exhibits themselves were filed under seal.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | Unknown | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Plaintiff was enticed by "promises of money" to... | View |
| N/A | Received | employer | Jane Doe | $100,000.00 | Hypothetical salary for absolute income example | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Epstein chose to settle the case before trial. | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein/E... | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Cash payments | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Mention of intent to give massage for monetary ... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane Doe | $0.00 | monetary com[pensation] for a massage (implied ... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Promise of payment for a massage (pretense for ... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Defendant intended to pay cash in exchange for ... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane Doe | $300.00 | Payment for massage mentioned in complaint | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane Doe | $200.00 | Fee paid on each occasion after Epstein ejacula... | View |
| 2017-10-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane Doe | $2,500,000.00 | Settlement payment. | View |
| 2016-06-20 | Paid | Jane Doe | U.S. District Cou... | $400.00 | Filing Fee for Complaint (Receipt Number 0208-1... | View |
| 2005-01-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane Doe | $300.00 | Payment for 'massage' (sexual acts). | View |
| 2004-11-09 | Received | Epstein/Kellen | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff for alleged acts | View |
| 2004-11-09 | Received | Mr. Epstein (impl... | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff documented in End... | View |
| 2004-10-12 | Received | Mr. Epstein (impl... | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff documented in End... | View |
| 2004-10-12 | Received | Epstein/Kellen | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff for alleged acts | View |
| 2004-10-09 | Received | Epstein/Kellen | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff for alleged acts | View |
| 2004-10-09 | Received | Mr. Epstein (impl... | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff documented in End... | View |
| 2004-08-30 | Received | Epstein/Kellen | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff for alleged acts | View |
| 2004-08-30 | Received | Mr. Epstein (impl... | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff documented in End... | View |
| 2004-07-30 | Received | Mr. Epstein (impl... | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff documented in End... | View |
| 2004-07-30 | Received | Epstein/Kellen | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff for alleged acts | View |
| 2004-06-07 | Received | Mr. Epstein (impl... | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff documented in End... | View |
| 2004-06-07 | Received | Epstein/Kellen | Jane Doe | $0.00 | Payment received by Plaintiff for alleged acts | View |
No Subject
Plaintiff believes she communicated with Kelly Bovino Umekubo.
Declaration of Plaintiff Jane Doe, Exhibit A
A written declaration by the plaintiff, submitted as Exhibit A in the case.
Criticism of Epstein plea bargain
A victim appeared on TV to criticize the unduly lenient plea bargain.
Criticism of plea bargain
Criticism of the unduly lenient plea bargain Epstein received.
Silence
Threatened that she would disappear like a specific 12-year-old female if she spoke out.
Defense
Questions suggesting Jane Doe is fabricating allegations.
Criticism of Plea Bargain
Jane Doe exercised First Amendment rights to criticize the unduly lenient plea bargain.
N/A
Phone records showing calls made by Indyke to Jane Doe
Instructions
Told her to remove her clothes; later told her to write down her name and phone number.
Massage Request
Epstein called Doe over the telephone requesting a massage for payment, which was a fraudulent pretense for sexual acts.
Investigation Interview
Jane Doe met with Pagan approximately 10-12 times regarding the case.
Police Report
Witness admits to lying to police about who was in the car with her when she went to Epstein's house.
Money and modeling career
Plaintiff was enticed with promises of money and a modeling career to attend parties.
Victim Statement
A statement read by Ms. Moe describing Maxwell's manipulation and role in Epstein's abuse.
Victim Statement
Written statement read aloud by Ms. Moe describing abuse by Maxwell and Epstein.
Victim impact statement regarding Jeffrey Epstein
Jane Doe provides a statement to the court detailing her sexual assault by Jeffrey Epstein in 2004 at Zorro Ranch when she was 15 years old. She describes the psychological manipulation and trauma she endured.
Threats
Short threatening calls (approx 20 seconds) received after filing the initial complaint.
Investigators at their homes
Investigators were knocking on their doors trying to talk about Jane Doe.
Motion for Writ of Habeas Corpus ad testificandum Alfredo...
Plaintiff's request to secure Alfredo Rodriguez for testimony.
Deposition Preparation
Met 'this morning' to prepare for deposition.
Solicitation
Scheduling times for Plaintiff to appear at Epstein's home for 'massages' or sexual services.
No Subject
Threatening call stating Jane Doe owed Decedent $10,000 for rent paid on her apartment.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity