JANE DOE NO. 2
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
9
Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Adversarial |
5
|
5 | |
|
person
Paul Cassell
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Edwards
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE DOE NO. 2's friend
|
Friend |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Herman
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unidentified Recruiter
|
Recruitment |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
BRAD EDWARDS
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Carolyn M. Andriano
|
Identity |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane Doe No. 103
|
Related plaintiffs |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane Doe No. 8
|
Co plaintiffs consolidated |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Stuart S. Mermelstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Litigation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Bradley J. Edwards
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Plaintiff against defendant |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Defendant vs plaintiff |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Accused of sexual touching of minor |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Herman
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE DOE NO. 1
|
Victims co petitioners |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Plaintiff vs defendant |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Paul O. Cassell
|
Counsel for plaintiff |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Plaintiff defendant |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
PAUL G. CASSELL
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
SARAH KELLEN
|
Adversarial plaintiff defendant |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
ADL
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Epstein summoned Jane Doe No. 2 to his home for a massage where she was sexually touched. | Epstein's Intracoastal home | View |
| 2019-09-03 | Court hearing | A court proceeding where a victim, identified as Jane Doe No. 2, begins to give her testimony reg... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2019-09-03 | Court hearing | Victims provide statements in a court proceeding related to Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. | N/A | View |
| 2011-10-11 | N/A | Victims filed discovery requests with the Government, seeking information about Dershowitz, Princ... | Federal court (S.D. Fla.) | View |
| 2010-06-25 | N/A | Order Affirming Magistrate Judge Johnson's Discovery Orders signed by Judge Marra. | West Palm Beach, Florida | View |
| 2010-02-22 | N/A | Scheduled trial docket. | US District Court | View |
| 2010-02-04 | N/A | Magistrate's Order entered granting in part and denying in part Jane Doe's Motion to Compel. | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2009-12-16 | N/A | Omnibus Order signed by Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson ruling on multiple motions. | West Palm Beach, Florida | View |
| 2009-11-13 | N/A | Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2 made herself available for Defendant's exam | Not specified | View |
| 2009-11-13 | N/A | Plaintiff made herself available for Defendant's exam. | Unknown | View |
| 2009-10-06 | N/A | Filing of Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel. | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2009-06-12 | N/A | Scheduled hearing for all cases consolidated for discovery under Jane Doe No. 2 vs. Jeffrey Epstein | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2008-02-01 | N/A | Publication of article regarding new lawsuit against Epstein | West Palm Beach, FL | View |
| 2008-01-01 | N/A | Edwards and Cassell filed a petition to enforce the rights of "Jane Doe No. 1" and "Jane Doe No. ... | Federal court (S.D. Fla.) | View |
| 2004-01-01 | N/A | Alleged scheme of sexual assault involving underage girls took place. | Palm Beach, New York, St. T... | View |
| 2004-01-01 | N/A | Alleged sexual assault/massage incident involving Jane Doe No. 2 | Epstein's Palm Beach mansion | View |
| 2002-01-01 | N/A | Period for which telephone records and massage scheduling information were requested. | 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Bea... | View |
044.pdf
This document is a Motion to Compel filed on July 10, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida, requesting the court to force Jeffrey Epstein to answer 23 specific requests for admission in a civil suit brought by Jane Doe No. 2. Epstein had previously asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to refuse answering questions regarding his net worth (alleged to be over $1 billion), his financial support of modeling agency MC2, his ownership of foreign property, and specific allegations of sexual assault, battery, and sex trafficking of minors. The plaintiff argues that the Fifth Amendment cannot be used as a blanket refusal in a civil case and demands Epstein answer or provide specific justification for his silence.
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.
042.pdf
This document is a Motion to Set Aside Order of Default filed by attorney Bruce E. Reinhart on behalf of defendant Sarah Kellen in the case Jane Doe No. 2 v. Sarah Kellen. Kellen argues that the default judgment entered on June 17, 2009, is invalid because the plaintiff failed to properly serve the summons under New York law (specifically regarding timing of filing the affidavit of service) and because the time for a responsive pleading had not yet expired when the default was entered.
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.
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.
030.pdf
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.
028.pdf
This document is a legal memorandum filed on May 28, 2010, by Plaintiffs (Jane Does 2-8) in the case Jane Doe No. 2 vs. Jeffrey Epstein (Case No. 08-CV-80119-MARRA/JOHNSON). The memorandum opposes Epstein's appeal of a Magistrate Judge's order compelling him to produce his income tax returns for the years 2003-2008. The Plaintiffs argue that the tax returns are not protected by the Fifth Amendment (citing the 'required records' exception and 'foregone conclusion' doctrine) and are critical for determining punitive damages given the allegations of sexual molestation and Epstein's refusal to provide net worth discovery beyond a stipulation of 'nine figures.'
017.pdf
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.
016.pdf
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.
011.pdf
Legal motion filed on August 11, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida, requesting to consolidate the case of Jane Doe No. 8 v. Jeffrey Epstein with the lead case Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein for discovery purposes. The document states that the case involves alleged sexual abuse in Palm Beach, Florida, in 2001. The motion was unopposed by the Defendant's counsel.
011-01.pdf
This document is a proposed court order filed on August 11, 2009, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. It grants a motion to consolidate the case of Jane Doe No. 8 v. Jeffrey Epstein with the existing case of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein for discovery purposes only.
059.pdf
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.
059-01.pdf
This is an Agreed Order from the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida, dated November 20, 2009. The order grants Jeffrey Epstein permission to attend the deposition, mediation, and trial involving Plaintiff Carolyn Andriano (referred to as CMA in the related case title), explicitly stating that a previous 'no contact order' does not preclude his attendance at these legal proceedings.
057.pdf
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.
055.pdf
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.
040.pdf
This document is a Motion to Compel filed on July 10, 2009, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida by Plaintiff Jane Doe (represented by Bradley Edwards). The motion requests the court to force Jeffrey Epstein to answer a set of interrogatories regarding his financial assets, net worth, foreign travel, property ownership, and alleged interactions with the plaintiff and other minor females. Epstein refused to answer nearly all questions (except for providing the name/address of the person answering), invoking his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and right to counsel.
039.pdf
This legal filing is a Motion to Compel submitted by Plaintiff Jane Doe against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The motion requests the court to order Epstein to answer 23 specific requests for admission regarding his net worth, asset transfers, and allegations of sexual abuse and trafficking of minors, which he had previously refused to answer by asserting Fifth Amendment privileges. The plaintiff argues that Epstein's blanket assertion of the privilege is improper and that he must provide a particularized justification for each refusal or face an adverse inference.
030.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Joinder' filed on June 8, 2009, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida, where Plaintiffs Jane Does 2-7 join a motion for a no-contact order against Jeffrey Epstein. The filing alleges that Epstein's associate and recruiter, Hayley Robson, has been harassing victims Jane Does 4 and 7 through text messages and in-person threats while claiming to be financially supported by and cooperating with Epstein. The plaintiffs request a court order prohibiting Epstein from any direct or indirect contact with the victims.
024.pdf
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.
022.pdf
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.
020.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Limited Appearance' filed on May 29, 2009, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. It lists multiple civil cases involving Jane Doe plaintiffs against Jeffrey Epstein. The United States, represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafaña (under U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta), files this notice to respond to a court order regarding Epstein's 'Motion to Stay Proceedings,' while explicitly stating the U.S. is not becoming a party to the litigation.
016-03.pdf
This document is a Court Order from the Southern District of Florida, dated May 26, 2009, granting a motion to preserve evidence in multiple civil cases against Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Kenneth A. Marra orders Epstein and his associates to preserve a wide range of materials, specifically highlighting records of domestic and international travel (including private airplanes), phone communications, financial records, and evidence related to the October 25, 2005 police search of his Palm Beach mansion. The order explicitly prohibits the destruction, alteration, or deletion of potential evidence dating back to 1998.
013.pdf
This document is a legal notice filed on May 20, 2009, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, involving multiple consolidated cases against Jeffrey Epstein. Plaintiff C.M.A. formally withdraws her objections to Epstein's motion to identify her by her legal name in the case style and in third-party subpoenas, rendering the motion to dismiss moot, though she continues to object to dismissal on alternative grounds. The document lists numerous 'Jane Doe' plaintiffs and provides a service list of attorneys representing both the plaintiffs (Jack Scarola, Jack P. Hill) and the defendant (Richard Willits, Robert Critton, Jack Goldberger, Bruce Reinhart).
086.pdf
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.
082.pdf
This document is a Reply filed by Jeffrey Epstein's legal team in November 2009 requesting a permanent order for the preservation of evidence held by the law firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler (RRA), which was undergoing restructuring. The filing highlights that the Department of Justice had seized approximately 40 boxes of documents from RRA, including about 13 boxes related to Epstein cases, amidst concerns of 'serious ethical and potentially criminal issues' at the firm. The document also argues against delaying the deposition of RRA's Chief Restructuring Officer, Herbert Stettin, citing upcoming trial deadlines.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008-02-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein (... | JANE DOE NO. 2 | $50,000,000.00 | Amount sued for in lawsuit | View |
| 2004-01-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | JANE DOE NO. 2 | $200.00 | Payment after massage/sexual encounter | View |
Motion to Compel
Motion to compel production of various materials.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity