Fort Lauderdale, FL
LocationRelationship Network
Jeffrey Epstein Part 19 of 19.pdf
This document contains FBI evidence logs (FD-340/FD-597) from March 2011 documenting the receipt of 20 photographs and notes from a cooperating witness regarding Jeffrey Epstein. The photos (grainy photocopies) depict locations including Paris (Dec 2000), Epstein's 'Zorro' Ranch in New Mexico, and a New York apartment. The file also includes a 2008 subpoena to Cingular/AT&T and a 2008 letter from US Attorney R. Alexander Acosta denying a request for information based on Grand Jury secrecy rules.
Epstein_Part_06_(Redacted).pdf
This document contains a news clipping about a lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein by a woman alleging he had sex with her when she was 16, alongside printed MySpace profile pages for a user named 'PIMP JUICE'. The news article details Epstein's ongoing legal issues and the defense's claims, while the MySpace profile provides personal details, interests, and comments from friends of a young individual. The handwritten note requests the document be placed in Epstein's criminal file, suggesting an ongoing investigation.
051.pdf
This document is a letter dated January 10, 2020, from attorney Bradley J. Edwards to Magistrate Judge Debra C. Freeman regarding five specific cases involving 'Doe' plaintiffs against Darren K. Indyke and other Epstein-related entities. Edwards informs the court that while discussions with the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program are productive, his clients do not wish to stay their lawsuits. The letter also outlines an agreed-upon discovery schedule with the Estate's counsel, Mr. Moskowitz.
045.pdf
This document is a Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law opposing a Motion to Dismiss in the case of VE v. Indyke et al. The plaintiff, a victim of Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse beginning in 2001 at age 16, argues that the corporate defendants (Nine East 71st Street Corp, Financial Trust Company, and NES LLC) are liable for negligence, negligent security, and negligent supervision. The memorandum asserts these entities were integral to Epstein's sex trafficking enterprise, with employees facilitating the recruitment and scheduling of victims, and argues that claims are valid under the New York Child Victims Act.
044.pdf
This document is a letter from Bradley J. Edwards (Edwards Pottinger LLC), attorney for Plaintiff VE, to Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street (1:19-cv-07625). The letter requests an extension of time to file an Opposition to the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, moving the deadline from December 13, 2019, to December 18, 2019. The document includes Judge Nathan's handwritten 'SO ORDERED' endorsement dated December 18, 2019.
041.pdf
This document is a letter filed on December 9, 2019, by attorney Bradley J. Edwards to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case VE v. Nine East 71st Street (1:19-cv-07625). The letter informs the court that the Plaintiff (VE) will not file an amended pleading in response to the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss filed in November 2019, but will instead defend the existing First Amended Complaint. The document establishes the legal representation of the plaintiff by Edwards Pottinger LLC in this civil action against an Epstein-related entity.
028.pdf
This document is a letter from attorney Bradley J. Edwards to Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of VE v. Nine East 71st Street, et al., dated November 12, 2019. Edwards opposes the Defendants' request for a two-week extension to respond to the complaint, arguing that they have already been granted a 45-day extension and that the upcoming Rule 26(f) conference should proceed. The letter notes that the Defendants' delay is related to a filing in the U.S. Virgin Islands regarding a 'claims resolution program' for the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein, which the Plaintiff argues should not halt the current litigation.
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.
004.pdf
This document is a Notice of Motion filed on August 20, 2019, in the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:19-cv-07625-AJN). The plaintiff, identified only as 'VE', is requesting permission to proceed anonymously in a lawsuit against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein and associated entities. The defendants include Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn as representatives of the estate, as well as Nine East 71st Street Corporation, Financial Trust Company, Inc., and NES, LLC.
073.pdf
This document is a legal memo endorsed by Judge Richard M. Berman on August 5, 2025, filed by the law firm Edwards Henderson on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein's victims. The attorneys request specific safeguards, including conferral, in-camera review, and pre-release review, before the unsealing of grand jury materials to ensure compliance with the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). They argue that the Department of Justice failed to properly notify victims before seeking to unseal these materials, raising concerns about the privacy and safety of the survivors.
047.pdf
Legal motion filed on June 25, 2009, by Jeffrey Epstein's defense team (Critton, Pike, Goldberger) in Palm Beach County Circuit Court. Epstein requests a stay on the disclosure of his Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) pending an appellate review, arguing that unsealing the document would cause irreparable harm to privacy rights and innocent third parties. The motion opposes efforts by the Palm Beach Post and a redacted non-party to unseal these court records.
041.pdf
This document is a 'Motion to Make Court Records Confidential' filed by Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys on June 11, 2009, in the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County. The defense seeks to maintain the seal on the Non-Prosecution Agreement (filed July 2008) and its Addendum, citing threats to the administration of justice and privacy rights of third parties. The motion references interventions by the Palm Beach Post and a non-party identified as 'EW' (whose name is redacted in one section) seeking access to these records.
035.pdf
This document is a motion filed on June 2, 2009, by The Palm Beach Post seeking to intervene in the criminal case against Jeffrey Epstein to unseal a non-prosecution agreement and its addendum. The Post argues that the sealing was improper, lacked necessary legal findings, and that the documents are of significant public interest given the accusations of soliciting minors. The document cites numerous civil lawsuits against Epstein and criticizes the secrecy surrounding his plea deal.
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.
017-15.pdf
This document is a Motion for Protective Order filed on June 28, 2010, by Jeffrey Epstein's legal team in the case of Jane Doe No. 2 vs. Jeffrey Epstein. The motion requests that the court issue an order of confidentiality regarding information Epstein was compelled to produce, specifically his tax returns, passport, and information provided by the federal government during prior criminal proceedings. The defense seeks to prevent this information from being disclosed to third parties or the media and to limit its use strictly to the current litigation.
001-02.pdf
This document is a Civil Cover Sheet filed on September 17, 2010, in the Southern District of Florida for Case 9:10-cv-81111. The plaintiff, identified only as M.J., is suing Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen for 'Sexual exploitation of a minor' and demanding a jury trial. The plaintiff is represented by attorney Bradley J. Edwards.
017.pdf
This document is a legal notice filed on June 14, 2010, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, regarding the case of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein. The filing, submitted by attorney Spencer T. Kuvin on behalf of Plaintiff 'C.L.', serves to withdraw a subpoena and cancel the scheduled deposition of Maritza Milagros Vasquez, which was set for the following day, June 15, 2010. The document also includes a certificate of service listing various attorneys representing different parties in related cases against Epstein.
010.pdf
This is a motion filed by Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys requesting a court order to allow him to attend mediation, deposition, and trial in the case of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein. The motion notes that a prior no-contact order involving Carolyn Andriano might technically preclude this, but states that Plaintiff's counsel and Ms. Andriano have no objection. The document includes a certificate of service listing numerous attorneys involved in related cases.
009.pdf
Legal filing from November 2009 in the case of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein's attorneys argue for the preservation of evidence held by the law firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler (RRA), noting that the DOJ has seized boxes of documents from RRA, including 13 boxes related to Epstein. The document also disputes delays in the deposition of RRA's Chief Restructuring Officer, Herbert Stettin, citing upcoming trial deadlines.
051.pdf
This document is a Joint Stipulation and Proposed Order filed on June 12, 2020, in the Southern District of New York, regarding the case of Teresa Helm v. The Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. The parties agreed to stay (pause) the legal proceedings for 60 days to allow the Plaintiff, Teresa Helm, to participate in the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program, a non-adversarial alternative to litigation. If the claims are resolved through the program, the plaintiff agrees to discontinue the lawsuit with prejudice.
042.pdf
This document is a legal letter dated May 11, 2020, from attorney Sigrid S. McCawley (representing Plaintiff Teresa Helm) to Judge Debra Freeman. The letter requests a court conference to address the Defendants' (Indyke and Kahn, executors of the Epstein estate) alleged failure to participate in discovery, specifically their refusal to produce documents related to Jeffrey Epstein's sex-trafficking conspiracy and to answer interrogatories regarding email accounts used by Epstein. McCawley argues that the Defendants are engaging in obstructionist delay tactics.
037.pdf
This document is a letter from Sigrid S. McCawley, representing Plaintiff Teresa Helm, to Judge Debra Freeman, requesting a pre-motion conference to compel Defendants Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn (Epstein's lawyer and accountant) to produce discovery documents and respond to interrogatories. The letter details Defendants' failure to comply with discovery obligations, including not producing any documents and improperly limiting the relevant time period for discovery, despite allegations that Jeffrey Epstein operated a decades-long sex-trafficking scheme and sexually assaulted the Plaintiff in 2002.
028.pdf
This document is an Affidavit of Service filed on March 20, 2020, in the case of Teresa Helm v. the Executors of the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. John Murphy of Troutman Sanders LLP attests that he served the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and supporting memorandum to attorneys David Boies II, Sigrid S. McCawley, and Joshua Schiller of Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP on February 24, 2020.
008.pdf
This document is a court order from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, dated November 25, 2019. It grants the motion for attorney Sigrid S. McCawley of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP to appear Pro Hac Vice as counsel for plaintiff Teresa Helm in her case against the executors of Jeffrey Epstein's estate. The order is signed by Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman.
029.pdf
This document is a Joint Stipulation and Order filed in April 2020 in the Southern District of New York, staying the lawsuit brought by Maria Farmer against the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. The stay was agreed upon to allow Farmer to participate in the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program, a non-adversarial alternative for resolving sexual abuse claims. The order was signed by Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity