Jane Doe
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005-01-01 | N/A | Alleged sexual assault of Jane Doe by Jeffrey Epstein. | Epstein's Mansion, Palm Beach | View |
| 2004-01-01 | Flight and sexual assault | Jane Doe, at age 15, was flown on Jeffrey Epstein's plane to Zorro Ranch, where he sexually moles... | Zorro Ranch | View |
| 2003-06-16 | N/A | Defendant Epstein solicited the Plaintiff for prostitution while she was a minor. | Palm Beach, FL | View |
| 2003-06-01 | N/A | Time period of alleged abuse/conduct mentioned in the complaint. | Epstein's home (implied) | View |
| 2003-01-01 | N/A | Alleged period where Epstein and Kellen persuaded, induced, or enticed Plaintiff to provide massa... | Epstein's home | View |
| 2001-01-01 | N/A | Recruitment of Jane Doe by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell (stated as nearly 19 years prior... | Unknown | View |
| 1994-01-01 | N/A | Juan Alessi drove minor Jane Doe from West Palm Beach to Decedent's home in Palm Beach multiple t... | Palm Beach, Florida | View |
| 1994-01-01 | N/A | Jane Doe travelled with Adam Perry Lang and Decedent on at least one occasion. | Unknown | View |
| 1994-01-01 | N/A | 13-year-old Jane Doe met Epstein at a summer camp. | Michigan | View |
| 1994-01-01 | N/A | Mark Epstein was present with Decedent and Doe on multiple occasions. | Unknown | View |
056-01.pdf
A court order from the Southern District of Florida dated August 2009 in the case of Jane Doe II vs. Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen. Judge Kenneth A. Marra grants Sarah Kellen's request to adopt co-defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Dismiss and Reply as her own arguments in the case.
052.pdf
This document is a Motion for Protective Order filed on July 29, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida by Plaintiffs 'Jane Does 2-7' against Jeffrey Epstein. The plaintiffs allege that Epstein hired private investigators to harass and intimidate them by contacting their former employers, ex-boyfriends, and friends to ask intrusive personal questions and potentially 'out' them as sexual abuse victims. The motion seeks a court order to stop Epstein's investigators from making ex parte contacts with nonparties associated with the plaintiffs.
050.pdf
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.
048.pdf
This is a legal reply filed by Sarah Kellen's attorney in July 2009, requesting the court set aside a default judgment in the case brought by Jane Doe II. The document argues that service of process in New York was legally deficient because the 'nail and mail' method was used without proper due diligence (attempts were made when Kellen was known to be out of town) and that the default was entered prematurely before the response deadline. Kellen also asserts a meritorious defense, stating she did not conspire with Jeffrey Epstein to commit sexual battery and was unaware of what occurred privately between Epstein and the Plaintiff.
047.pdf
This document is a Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law filed on July 14, 2009, in the case of Jane Doe II v. Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen. The Plaintiff opposes Sarah Kellen's motion to set aside a default judgment, arguing that Kellen was properly served via 'nail and mail' in New York on April 23, 2009, after six attempts, and deliberately ignored the lawsuit. The filing asserts Kellen has provided no evidence she didn't receive service and has failed to present a meritorious defense as required by law.
045.pdf
This document is a Motion to Compel filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe against Jeffrey Epstein on July 10, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiff lists 23 specific interrogatories regarding Epstein's finances, properties, travel, and alleged sexual abuse of minors, all of which Epstein refused to answer by invoking his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. The motion argues that Epstein's blanket refusals are improper and requests the court force him to answer or provide a privilege log.
043.pdf
This document is a Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's First Request for Production filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida (Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON). The motion argues that Epstein has improperly asserted blanket Fifth Amendment privileges in response to sixteen specific requests for production of documents, including telephone records, appointment books, financial records, and correspondence. The Plaintiff requests the Court to order Epstein to answer the requests, provide a particularized justification for his Fifth Amendment invocations, and produce a privilege log.
040.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Reliance' filed on June 19, 2009, in the case of Jane Doe II v. Jeffrey Epstein (Case No. 09-CIV-80469) in the Southern District of Florida. Epstein's legal team informs the court that despite the Plaintiff filing an Amended Memorandum of Law on June 12, 2009, Epstein will not file a new supplemental reply but will instead rely on his previous arguments filed on June 1, 2009. The document outlines the procedural history of the motion to dismiss and includes a certificate of service listing attorneys for both parties.
039.pdf
A court order from the Southern District of Florida dated June 16, 2009, granting a default judgment against Sarah Kellen in a civil case filed by Jane Doe II. Judge Kenneth A. Marra ruled that Kellen failed to respond to the complaint despite being properly served under New York state law. Jeffrey Epstein is listed as a co-defendant in the case header.
037.pdf
This document is a Plaintiff's Motion for Default filed on June 12, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida against Sarah Kellen in the case of Jane Doe II vs. Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen. The motion asserts that Kellen has been avoiding service but was successfully served according to New York law and failed to respond. Notably, it alleges that Kellen is aware of the legal action and has visited Jeffrey Epstein at the Palm Beach County Jail on several occasions.
037-01.pdf
This document is an Affidavit of Service filed in the Southern District of Florida for the case Jane Doe II v. Jeffrey Epstein. It details multiple attempts by process server Joseph Sanchez in April 2009 to serve Sarah Kellen (a/k/a Sarah Bonk) at her New York apartment. After several failed attempts where the doorman stated she was out of town or not home, service was eventually effected on April 25, 2009, by leaving the papers with the doorman, identified as Hector 'Doe', followed by a mailed copy.
031.pdf
This document is a Reply by Defendant Jeffrey Epstein to Plaintiff Jane Doe II's opposition to his motion to dismiss a civil suit (Case 09-CIV-80469). Epstein's defense argues that a concurrent state action requires dismissal of the federal case, that the 2006 amendment to 18 U.S.C. §2255 ('Masha's Law') cannot be applied retroactively to conduct from 2003-2005 to increase damages, and that the Plaintiff misrepresents the terms of Epstein's non-prosecution agreement with the US Attorney's Office. The document details specific dates in 2003 and 2004 where the Plaintiff alleges she received payments for acts of prostitution.
021.pdf
This document is a Notice of Filing Proposed Order submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on May 27, 2009. It lists eleven separate civil cases filed against Jeffrey Epstein by various plaintiffs, including Jane Does 2-7, 101, 102, C.M.A., and Doe II. The filing serves to submit a proposed order related to case no. 08-80119 and includes a service list of attorneys involved in the litigation.
020.pdf
This document is the Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant Epstein's Motion to Dismiss in a civil case. The Plaintiff argues that the federal court has jurisdiction alongside state claims, that the 2006 amendments to 18 U.S.C. §2255 regarding damages should apply retroactively or are procedural, and that interstate commerce requirements were met via phone calls made by co-defendant Sarah Kellen from a New York number. The document details specific dates of solicitation between 2003 and 2005 and alleges a conspiracy involving Epstein, Kellen, and Haley Robson to procure minors for prostitution.
016.pdf
This document is a legal motion filed on May 15, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida, case number 09-80469-CIV-MARRA. Plaintiff Jane Doe II requests an extension until May 22, 2009, to file a reply to Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to Dismiss, citing complex issues and other business. Epstein's counsel, Robert Critton, was consulted and did not oppose the extension.
013.pdf
This document is a Motion to Dismiss filed by Jeffrey Epstein's defense team in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on May 6, 2009, against Plaintiff Jane Doe II. The defense argues that the federal case should be dismissed because a nearly identical state case was filed 10 months prior, and because the plaintiff is improperly applying a 2006 amendment to 18 U.S.C. §2255 retroactively to conduct alleged to have occurred between 2003 and 2005, thereby violating the Ex Post Facto clause. Additionally, the motion argues that the statute does not allow for multiplying damages per incident and that the plaintiff failed to allege the necessary interstate commerce elements required for federal jurisdiction.
013-02.pdf
This document is a Clerk's Notice of Reassignment from the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Florida, dated April 10, 2009. It notifies parties in the case of Jane Doe II vs. Jeffrey Epstein (Case ID: 502008CA020614XXXXMB) that the case has been reassigned from Judge Diana Lewis to Judge Donald W. Hafele. The document lists attorneys Robert Critton Jr, Michael Pike, Isidro Garcia, and Jack Goldberger on the distribution list.
009.pdf
This document is a legal response filed by Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys on May 4, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida. Epstein opposes the court's potential order to consolidate multiple civil lawsuits (filed by various 'Jane Doe' plaintiffs) for all discovery purposes, arguing that while consolidating depositions is acceptable, full consolidation would confuse distinct facts and defenses unique to each case. The filing lists numerous related case numbers and requests clarification on how consolidation would operate regarding motion practice.
007.pdf
This document is an unopposed motion filed on May 1, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida (Case 09-CIV-80469) by Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys requesting a five-day extension to file a response to Jane Doe II's complaint. The extension (until May 6, 2009) was requested because Epstein's counsel, Robert D. Critton, Jr., was preparing for an unrelated state court trial. The document confirms that Plaintiff's counsel, Isidro M. Garcia, agreed to this extension.
006.pdf
This document is a Court Order from the United States District Court Southern District of Florida, dated April 28, 2009, presided over by Judge Kenneth A. Marra. The order grants the Plaintiffs' motion for a protective order against piecemeal depositions, limiting Jeffrey Epstein (Defendant) to a single deposition of each plaintiff across ten related civil cases. It also consolidates four specific cases (08-80119, 08-80232, 08-80380, and 08-80993) for the purposes of discovery and orders parties in the remaining six cases to show cause why they should not also be consolidated.
005.pdf
This document is a court order from March 30, 2009, in the case of Jane Doe II vs. Jeffrey Epstein and Sara Kellen (Case No. 09-80469-CIV-MARRA) in the Southern District of Florida. Judge Kenneth A. Marra orders counsel to confer and file a joint scheduling and discovery report pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The order outlines specific deadlines for pretrial discovery planning and scheduling conferences.
004.pdf
This document is an Order of Transfer from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, dated March 2009. Judge Kenneth L. Ryskamp transfers the case of Jane Doe II v. Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen (Case No. 09-80469) to Judge Kenneth A. Marra. The transfer is ordered because the case is related to several lower-numbered cases already assigned to Judge Marra (including 08-80069, 08-80119, etc.).
003.pdf
This document is an 'Order of Pretrial Procedures' from the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, dated March 25, 2009, in the civil case of Jane Doe II vs. Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen. It outlines the procedural requirements for the case, including deadlines for scheduling meetings, reports, and discovery planning, and warns of sanctions for non-compliance. The document also includes a sample 'Scheduling Order' template detailing rules for pretrial stipulations, jury instructions, and witness lists.
002.pdf
This document is a Civil Summons from the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, dated March 24, 2009. It notifies defendants Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen (a.k.a. Sarah Bonk) that they are being sued by Jane Doe II and must respond within 20 days. Notably, the summons lists Sarah Kellen's address in New York City and Jeffrey Epstein's address as the Palm Beach County Stockade, including his inmate jacket number.
024.pdf
This document is an unopposed motion filed on September 18, 2008, by Plaintiff Jane Doe in the Southern District of Florida (Case 08-80804) against Jeffrey Epstein, Haley Robson, and Sarah Kellen. The plaintiff requests an extension of time to respond to Epstein's Motion to Dismiss until 15 days after the court rules on a pending motion to remand the case to state court due to alleged lack of federal jurisdiction. The document lists legal counsel for all parties, including Bruce Reinhart representing Sarah Kellen.
| 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.
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
Declaration of Plaintiff Jane Doe, Exhibit A
A written declaration by the plaintiff, submitted as Exhibit A in the case.
Money and modeling career
Plaintiff was enticed with promises of money and a modeling career to attend parties.
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.
Defense
Questions suggesting Jane Doe is fabricating allegations.
Silence
Threatened that she would disappear like a specific 12-year-old female if she spoke out.
Criticism of plea bargain
Criticism of the unduly lenient plea bargain Epstein received.
Investigation Interview
Jane Doe met with Pagan approximately 10-12 times regarding the case.
Criticism of Epstein plea bargain
A victim appeared on TV to criticize the unduly lenient plea bargain.
Police Report
Witness admits to lying to police about who was in the car with her when she went to Epstein's house.
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