Bradley Edwards
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
15
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Alan Dershowitz
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Virginia Roberts
|
Client |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Jack Scarola
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Paul Cassell
|
Co counsel |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Paul Cassell
|
Business associate |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
L.M., E.W., Jane Doe
|
Client |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jack Scarola
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Unknown |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Narrator
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
S.R.
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alan Dershowitz
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Virginia Giuffre
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN
|
Employment |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
C.W. "Bill" Young
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Larry Visoki
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
SCOTT ROTHSTEIN
|
Alleged conspirator denied |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
T.M. Griffith
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Cassell
|
Co plaintiffs co counsel |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Bradley Edwards files motion accusing Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz. | West Palm Beach court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of a legal motion accusing Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz. | West Palm Beach court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Anticipated Trial | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of abuse of process claim | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein settled three cases handled by Edwards. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of Alan Dershowitz where he denies allegations. | Legal setting | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's state court plea hearing, where Bradley Edwards began representing Jane Doe #2. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Edwards and Cassell request to add Virginia Giuffre (Jane Doe No. 3) to the case. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Motion for Summary Judgment | Court (likely Florida) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Bradley Edwards joining Scott Rothstein's firm. | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Filing of civil suits against Epstein | Unknown | View |
| 2025-12-04 | N/A | Case in state court pitting Bradley Edwards against Epstein | Palm Beach County | View |
| 2018-12-04 | N/A | Epstein settles defamation lawsuit with Bradley Edwards. | West Palm Beach, Fla. | View |
| 2018-12-04 | N/A | Jeffrey Epstein agrees to settle a civil case brought by Bradley Edwards. | Unknown | View |
| 2018-12-04 | N/A | Jeffrey Epstein agreed to settle a civil case brought by attorney Bradley Edwards. | Unknown | View |
| 2018-12-04 | N/A | Scheduled start of civil trial regarding Edwards' allegations of malicious prosecution by Epstein. | Palm Beach County Court | View |
| 2018-01-01 | Meeting | Meetings took place between attorneys for accusing witnesses and SDNY prosecutors concerning or r... | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2017-09-01 | N/A | Court documents filed revealing settlement amounts ('filed last week' relative to Oct 3, 2017). | Court | View |
| 2017-01-01 | Litigation | CVRA (Crime Victims' Rights Act) litigation during which victims' attorney Bradley Edwards filed ... | N/A | View |
| 2016-04-10 | N/A | Publication of article regarding settlement between Dershowitz and Edwards/Cassell. | N/A | View |
| 2016-04-08 | N/A | Settlement of defamation claims between Edwards/Cassell and Dershowitz. | Broward County, Florida | View |
| 2016-04-08 | N/A | Settlement of lawsuits between Dershowitz, Edwards, and Cassell. | N/A | View |
| 2016-01-01 | Meeting | Meetings took place where certain attorneys for accusing witnesses met with SDNY prosecutors to a... | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2015-10-01 | N/A | Alan Dershowitz appears at a Florida courthouse regarding defamation suits involving Bradley Edwa... | Florida courthouse | View |
| 2015-03-24 | N/A | Motion entered on FLSD Docket. | Broward County, Florida | View |
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.
023-01.pdf
A legal certification filed on November 23, 2010, in the Florida Southern District Court (Case 9:10-cv-81111). Attorney Lilly Ann Sanchez, representing Jeffrey Epstein, certifies that she has conferred with plaintiff's counsel Bradley Edwards regarding a Motion to Strike and various other legal disputes including allegations of a fraudulent affidavit submitted by Epstein.
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.
018.pdf
This document is a Motion for Stay filed by defendants Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen in a civil lawsuit brought by Jane Doe. They argue that a stay is mandatory under federal law because of a pending federal criminal investigation/action (the deferred prosecution agreement). Attached is a declaration from AUSA A. Marie Villafana detailing the government's interaction with victims (T.M., C.W., S.R.) and providing copies of notification letters sent to them and their attorneys regarding their rights and the non-prosecution agreement.
EFTA00030511.pdf
An email dated July 30, 2019, circulating a South Florida Sun Sentinel article. The article discusses the legal conflict regarding Epstein's 2007 non-prosecution agreement in Florida, noting that while some victims want new charges in Florida following his New York arrest, prosecutors argue others wish to avoid reopening the case to protect their privacy. Lawyers for victims Jane Doe 1 and 2 argue that the privacy concerns of some should not prevent the prosecution of Epstein and his co-conspirators.
EFTA00027770.pdf
This document is an email from May 2019 forwarding a Law360 article titled 'Epstein Victims Demand Apology From Prosecutors'. The article details how two victims (Jane Does) requested a Florida federal court to nullify the 2008 non-prosecution agreement signed by then-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, arguing it violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The victims sought nullification of the deal, a reopening of the criminal case, an apology, and a hearing with Acosta and Epstein present.
EFTA00014146.pdf
This document is a declaration by an Assistant US Attorney in the Southern District of Florida responding to a victim's emergency petition regarding the Epstein case. It details the timeline of the federal investigation, the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), and the government's efforts (and limitations) in notifying victims. The declaration notably reveals that attorney James Eisenberg, who represented a victim, was paid by Epstein, and explains why certain victims were not included in the federal indictment list due to credibility concerns.
EFTA00011115.pdf
This document is a legal memorandum filed on October 13, 2021, by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team in the Southern District of New York. The defense argues that due to 'tsunami' of negative pretrial publicity surrounding Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein (including books, podcasts, and documentaries), standard jury selection is insufficient. They request the Court allow individual sequestered voir dire and limited attorney-conducted questioning to identify and remove biased jurors.
EFTA00011096.pdf
This document is a legal memorandum filed on October 13, 2021, by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team in the Southern District of New York. The defense argues for individual sequestered voir dire (jury selection questioning) and permission for attorneys to conduct limited questioning of jurors, citing 'tsunami' levels of negative pretrial publicity and the inflammatory nature of the sexual abuse charges. The motion lists numerous documentaries, podcasts, and books as evidence of prejudicial media coverage that allegedly demonizes Maxwell and links her inextricably to Jeffrey Epstein's crimes.
DOJ-OGR-00023267.tif
This document discusses the application of CVRA (Crime Victims' Rights Act) rights, referencing a federal prosecution related to a 2005 BP oil refinery explosion where victim notification was initially bypassed. It also details how, in June 2008, victims like Wild and Villafaña sought legal representation from Bradley Edwards to understand the federal criminal case against Jeffrey Epstein, highlighting communications and the role of OPR in investigating such interactions.
DOJ-OGR-00015113.jpg
This document is the signature page (page 18 of 27) of a legal filing submitted to Judge Paul A. Engelmayer in Case 1:20-cr-00330. Attorneys Bradley Edwards, Brittany Henderson, and Paul G. Cassell argue for the protection of victim rights under the CVRA, specifically requesting privacy protections and victim participation regarding the release of grand jury materials. The filing date listed in the header is August 6, 2025.
DOJ-OGR-00001638.jpg
This legal document, dated July 21, 2020, is page 4 of a filing to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It argues that public statements made by FBI Special Agent William Sweeney and attorneys for witnesses (David Boies, Sigrid McCawley, Bradley Edwards) are prejudicial against Ghislaine Maxwell and violate local court rules. The document quotes these individuals characterizing Maxwell as a villain, speculating on her cooperation, and defining her role as the primary facilitator for Jeffrey Epstein's crimes.
DOJ-OGR-00018425.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The questioning focuses on her participation in a chat group with other women who claimed abuse by Jeffrey Epstein, her contact with Virginia Roberts, and whether they share the same attorney, Bradley Edwards. An attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, successfully objects to a line of questioning on the grounds of hearsay.
DOJ-OGR-00021477.jpg
This legal document details communications surrounding the federal investigation of Epstein, focusing on the information provided to victims and their attorney, Bradley Edwards. Investigator Villafaña told victims and Edwards that the investigation was active and ongoing, while officials like Sloman and Acosta were concerned that disclosing the terms of a non-prosecution agreement (NPA), including a potential $150,000 payment, would compromise the victims' credibility as witnesses in a potential trial.
DOJ-OGR-00019493.jpg
This page from a legal filing dated July 21, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan, argues that government officials (Ms. Strauss and FBI Agent William Sweeney) and private attorneys (David Boies, Sigrid McCawley, and Bradley Edwards) made prohibited, prejudicial public statements regarding Ghislaine Maxwell. The document cites specific quotes comparing Maxwell to a 'snake' and 'villain,' as well as speculation about her potential cooperation with prosecutors to implicate other 'wealthy and influential people.' The filing asserts these comments violate Local Rule 23.1.
DOJ-OGR-00004699.jpg
This legal document, part of an affidavit by an Assistant U.S. Attorney, describes the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein that began in 2006. It focuses on the process of notifying victims, specifically mentioning letters sent by the U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI to victims C.W., T.M., and S.R. The document confirms these three individuals, represented by attorney Bradley Edwards, were minor victims of Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00005211.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated October 13, 2021, filed by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team. The filing argues that Maxwell has been prejudiced by overwhelming negative media coverage, citing Google search result statistics and a list of specific documentaries, podcasts, and books released about her and Jeffrey Epstein. The defense asserts they have not spoken to the media nor contributed to this publicity.
DOJ-OGR-00002725.jpg
This legal document, filed on February 4, 2021, is a request for the production of documents related to defense motions in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It seeks all communications concerning the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Jeffrey Epstein, including those between various government agencies and Epstein's lawyers. The request also demands communications from meetings in 2016 and 2018 where attorneys for Epstein's victims urged the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) to launch a criminal investigation into both Epstein and Maxwell.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022176.jpg
This document is an excerpt from the book 'Filthy Rich' detailing a complex legal battle where Jeffrey Epstein sued attorney Bradley Edwards and Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein. Epstein alleged that Rothstein used litigation against him as 'bait' to lure investors into a Ponzi scheme, while also attempting to discredit a victim (L.M.) by claiming she was a prostitute who changed her story after hiring Edwards. Edwards responded with a motion for summary judgment, arguing Epstein's claims were frivolous and noting that Epstein pleaded the Fifth Amendment dozens of times during depositions.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022175.jpg
This document is a page from a James Patterson book (likely 'Filthy Rich') included in House Oversight records. It details former State Attorney Barry Krischer's life after the Epstein case and describes a December 2009 RICO lawsuit filed by Jeffrey Epstein against Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein, attorney Bradley Edwards, and a victim identified as 'L.M.' The text outlines Epstein's allegations that Edwards knew about Rothstein's Ponzi scheme and claims that the victim 'L.M.' had credibility issues involving drug use and changing stories.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022170.jpg
These pages, likely from the book 'Filthy Rich' and marked as House Oversight evidence, detail Alan Dershowitz's defense of his legal work for Jeffrey Epstein and his conflict with attorneys Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell. The text describes a protest against Dershowitz at Johns Hopkins University and his assertion that he is proud of the 'good deal' he secured for Epstein. It concludes with the details of an April 8, 2016 settlement where Edwards and Cassell withdrew sexual misconduct accusations against Dershowitz, and Dershowitz withdrew his claims of unethical conduct against them.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022166.jpg
This document contains pages 268-269 from the book 'Filthy Rich' (marked as a House Oversight exhibit), discussing the legal battles surrounding the Epstein case. The text analyzes Alan Dershowitz's defense strategy, which alleged that attorneys Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell were involved in a blackmail plot against Leslie Wexner and had connections to Scott Rothstein's Ponzi scheme. The author speculates on the psychological leverage used in the case, suggesting Edwards may have pressured Virginia Roberts to implicate Dershowitz to break Epstein's non-prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022165.jpg
This document is an excerpt from James Patterson's book (likely 'Filthy Rich') detailing the legal maneuvering between lawyer Bradley Edwards and Alan Dershowitz. It describes how Edwards briefly worked for Scott Rothstein's fraudulent firm in 2009, a fact Dershowitz later used to argue that accusations against him by Virginia Roberts were part of an extortion plot hatched by Edwards to overturn Epstein's non-prosecution agreement. The text notes that Edwards was cleared of knowledge regarding Rothstein's Ponzi scheme.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022164.jpg
This document contains pages 266 and 267 from a book, likely a memoir by Alan Dershowitz given the context of the defense against Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell regarding sexual allegations and Prince Andrew. Page 266 features the narrator attacking the credibility of lawyers Edwards and Cassell. Page 267 (Chapter 67) details the profile of Scott Rothstein, a Fort Lauderdale lawyer running a Ponzi scheme who made large donations to politicians like McCain and Schwarzenegger.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022163.jpg
This document appears to be an excerpt from a book (likely by James Patterson) containing a transcript of a deposition or interview. The speaker (contextually Alan Dershowitz) vehemently denies sexual contact with Virginia Roberts and attacks the credibility of lawyers Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell, linking Edwards to convicted Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein. The second page provides a profile of Scott Rothstein in 2009, detailing his lavish lifestyle and political connections.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Bradley Edwards | $0.00 | Settlement of three cases handled by Edwards. E... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Bradley Edwards | $0.00 | Epstein paid significant sums in settlement of ... | View |
| 2018-12-04 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Bradley Edwards | $0.00 | Settlement for defamation lawsuit (undisclosed ... | View |
| 2018-01-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Bradley Edwards | $0.00 | Settlement of lawsuit in Palm Beach. | View |
| 2008-07-01 | Received | N/A | Bradley Edwards | $0.00 | Bradley Edwards was working pro bono; the suit ... | View |
Motion for Summary Judgment
Denied Epstein's allegations and called claims frivolous.
Statement about Ms. Maxwell's role
Attorney Bradley Edwards stated that Ghislaine Maxwell was the 'main facilitator' for Jeffrey Epstein's activities.
Knowledge of Rothstein
Edwards denied knowing Rothstein was marketing Epstein cases.
Denial of witnessing abuse
"And I wrote that to you, something that you have falsely denied."
Accusations against Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz
Filed a motion on behalf of two unnamed women accusing Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz of participating directly in Epstein’s illegal activities.
Defamation Lawsuit Settlement
Epstein apologized and agreed to pay an undisclosed amount to settle defamation lawsuit.
Status of the Epstein investigation
Victims' attorney Bradley Edwards called Villafaña to ask about the stage of the investigation. Villafaña replied that it was an 'on-going active investigation' but could not provide more details.
Motion to Quash
Initial objection to RFP 19 and RFP 20 claiming production would be a 'burden'.
Service of Subpoena Duces Tecum
Email correspondence regarding service of Subpoena Duces Tecum for Mr. Edwards (Exhibit R)
Exhibit I
Deposition of Bradley Edwards
Exhibit J
Deposition of Bradley Edwards
Sexual contact allegations
Dershowitz claims this conversation is alleged to have happened secretly, but denies its truth.
Resolution of issues regarding Defendant's Motion to Strike
Counsel conferred in a good faith effort to resolve issues contained within the Defendant's Motion to Strike (D.E. 20).
Service of Process
Edwards informed Knight that someone at Epstein's NY residence had accepted service.
Victim Status Notification
Informed Edwards he was determined to be a victim (or potential victim) of Scott Rothstein's federal crimes and outlined his rights.
Victim Status Notification
Informed Edwards he was a victim or potential victim of Scott Rothstein's federal crimes.
Epstein litigation / plane passengers
Visoki admitted various high-profile figures were on the plane with young girls present but denied suspecting sexual activity.
Epstein's plane passengers
Visoki admitted specific high-profile passengers were on board while young girls were present, but swore he did not suspect sexual activity.
Enforcement of federal laws
Urged vigorous enforcement but contained no demand for relief requested in the Emergency Petition. Received by AUSA on July 7, 2008.
Plea Hearing Notification
Notified Edwards of the plea hearing scheduled for June 30, 2008.
Representation of victims
Edwards informed AUSA he represented victims and asked to meet.
Accusations against Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz
Motion filed on behalf of two unnamed women accusing them of participating in illegal activities.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity