Bradley James Edwards
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jane Doe
|
Client |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Jay Howell
|
Co counsel |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Marie Villafaña
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Marie Villafaña
|
Professional opposing counsel interaction |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
L.M.
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jay Howell
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Paul Cassell
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Marie Villafaña
|
Professional communication |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Depositions of Co-conspirators | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of state and federal court actions against Jeffrey Epstein. | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Depositions of Epstein's co-conspirators taken by Bradley James Edwards and other attorneys. | 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 |
| 2008-07-11 | N/A | Hearing before Judge Marra where the non-prosecution agreement was described. | Court | View |
| 2008-07-11 | N/A | Hearing regarding Crime Victims' Rights Act where the non-prosecution agreement was described. | Court of Judge Marra | View |
| 2008-01-01 | N/A | Bradley James Edwards was retained by three clients, including Jane Doe, to pursue civil litigati... | Hollywood, FL | View |
017-20.pdf
This affidavit by attorney Bradley Edwards details difficulties in discovery for a civil case against Jeffrey Epstein (Case 10-81111). It alleges that key witnesses Ghislaine Maxwell and Jean Luc Brunel evaded depositions by falsely claiming to be out of the country. Crucially, it lists specific individuals for whom Epstein paid legal fees to prevent them from testifying against him, explicitly labeling Sarah Kellen as a 'procurer of girls' and Nadia Marcinkova as a 'live-in sex slave', while also identifying his personal pilots and household staff.
016-13.pdf
This document is a Motion for Sanctions filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 3 against Jeffrey Epstein on January 4, 2010. The motion alleges that Epstein flagrantly violated multiple court orders, including a No-Contact Order, by deliberately appearing at the location of the Plaintiff's Independent Medical Examination (IME) on November 24, 2009. The Plaintiff requests sanctions, attorney's fees, and a protective order moving the remainder of her IME to a different city, citing the trauma caused by the encounter.
015-01.pdf
Affidavit by attorney Bradley Edwards in Case 10-81111 detailing obstruction tactics by Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. The document asserts that Jean Luc Brunel visited Epstein 67 times in jail and that both Brunel and Ghislaine Maxwell evaded depositions by falsely claiming to be out of the country. It explicitly lists Epstein's inner circle (including pilots and household staff like Sarah Kellen and Nadia Marcinkova) and notes that Epstein paid for their legal counsel to control their testimony.
015.pdf
This document is a legal memorandum filed on May 28, 2010, by Plaintiffs (Jane Does 2-8) opposing Jeffrey Epstein's appeal of a Magistrate Judge's order compelling him to produce income tax returns for the years 2003-2008. The Plaintiffs argue that tax returns are 'required records' not protected by the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and are critical for determining punitive damages. The document notes that Epstein attempted to avoid producing these records by offering to stipulate to a net worth in the 'nine figures,' which the Plaintiffs rejected as insufficient.
076.pdf
This document is a legal memorandum filed by the Plaintiffs (Jane Does 2-8) in response to Jeffrey 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 relevant for determining punitive damages and are not protected by the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, citing the 'required records' exception. The document also notes Epstein's attempt to avoid producing records by offering to stipulate to a net worth in the 'nine figures,' which the Plaintiffs reject as insufficient.
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.
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.
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.'
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.
045.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, Hayley Robson (who originally recruited the victims), has been harassing Jane Does 4 and 7 via text messages and in-person threats while claiming to be financially supported by Epstein. The plaintiffs argue that a court order is necessary to prevent Epstein from contacting or harassing victims through third parties like Robson.
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_013463.jpg
This document is an affidavit by attorney Bradley James Edwards regarding the civil case of Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein in the Southern District of Florida. It details Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), his repeated invocation of the 5th Amendment during depositions to avoid self-incrimination regarding sex crimes against minors, and the depositions of his co-conspirators who were employed to procure underage girls. The document highlights that Jane Doe refused to limit her damages to $150,000 as stipulated in the NPA and asserts that Epstein's co-conspirators helped protect him from law enforcement detection.
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_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_013489.tif
This affidavit, authored by Bradley James Edwards, details his role as lead attorney for 'Jane Doe' in a civil case against Jeffrey Epstein. It outlines Epstein's non-prosecution agreement (NPA) with the federal government, his invocation of the Fifth Amendment in response to allegations, and his attempts to discredit Jane Doe's testimony. The document also mentions the existence of Epstein's co-conspirators who allegedly facilitated his crimes and were deposed.
Notice of hearing
Provided notice of a hearing on June 30, but did not disclose the non-prosecution agreement implications.
Notice of Epstein's plea hearing
AUSA Villafaña called Edwards to provide notice to his clients about Epstein's plea hearing scheduled for June 30, 2008.
Notice of plea hearing
Villafaña called to provide notice regarding a hearing but did not disclose that state pleas would block federal prosecution.
Representation of Jane Does
Informed her of representation and asked to meet to provide information regarding Epstein.
Representation of Jane Doe #1 and #2, information regardi...
Edwards contacted AUSA Villafaña to inform her of his representation of Jane Doe #1 and #2 and to request a meeting to provide information regarding Epstein.
Representation of victims
Edwards informed AUSA Villafaña of his representation of Jane Doe #1 (E.W.) and Jane Doe #2 (L.M.) and asked to meet.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity