Jack Scarola
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Bradley J. Edwards
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Client |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Bradley Edwards
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
[Redacted Plaintiff]
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Virginia Roberts
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Plaintiffs
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Donald Trump
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Bradley Edwards
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Brad
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
victims
|
Professional counsel for |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Adversarial defendant vs counsel for victims |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Edwards
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Thomas E. Scott
|
Opposing counsel co counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Virginia Roberts
|
No prior communication |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Brad
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
James E. Hill
|
Professional press |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
BRAD EDWARDS
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Plaintiffs
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Robert C. Josefsberg
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Witnesses who testified
|
Client |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Questioning of Attorneys Jack Scarola, Brad Edwards, and Robert Glassman by the defense. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Upcoming trial in Palm Beach County Circuit Court. | Palm Beach County Circuit C... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Malicious prosecution suit against Epstein likely to go to trial. | Palm Beach County Circuit C... | View |
| N/A | Legal request and opposition | The defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell, made a request to call Jack Scarola, Brad Edwards, and Robert G... | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Representation/bringing to government | Jack Scarola represented Carolyn and brought her to the government. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Conversation | Jack Scarola talked to other witnesses. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal action | The witness, Carolyn, filed a claim with the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal action | The witness filed a claim with the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund. | N/A | View |
| 2025-12-04 | N/A | Case in state court pitting Bradley Edwards against Epstein | Palm Beach County | View |
| 2021-05-03 | N/A | Issuance and distribution of an Order regarding the trial date in United States v. Ghislaine Maxw... | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2021-01-26 | N/A | Conference between Jack Scarola and the witness regarding testimony. | Florida (presumed) | View |
| 2021-01-21 | N/A | Approximate date of AUSA's trip to Florida to meet Jack Scarola (referenced as 'last week' in Jan... | Florida | View |
| 2020-07-17 | N/A | Scheduled WebEx interview/meeting with the witness at Jack Scarola's office. | Jack Scarola's Office | View |
| 2020-07-17 | N/A | Video interview/meeting with witness, Jack Scarola, Mike, and FBI/Prosecutors via WebEx. | Jack Scarola's Office (Conf... | View |
| 2020-01-01 | Legal action | Carolyn, through her lawyer, responds and gets in touch with the government, right after the vict... | N/A | View |
| 2019-08-07 | N/A | Jack Scarola informs SDNY prosecutors about a victim willing to testify regarding molestation and... | Email correspondence | View |
| 2019-03-05 | N/A | Miami federal prosecutors sent a letter recusing themselves from the case. | Miami | View |
| 2019-01-01 | Legal action | Carolyn's lawyer, Jack Scarola, contacted the government. | N/A | 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 |
| 2016-08-01 | N/A | Scarola put Trump on the witness list. | Palm Beach | View |
| 2016-07-07 | N/A | Filing of Motion to File an Over Length Reply by Bradley J. Edwards. | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2016-07-07 | N/A | Filing of Motion to Seal Bradley J. Edwards' Motion to Quash Subpoena. | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2016-04-08 | N/A | Filing of Notice of Withdrawal in Edwards & Cassell v. Dershowitz. | Broward County, Florida | View |
| 2016-02-03 | N/A | Electronic filing and service of legal documents through the Clerk of Broward County | Broward County, Florida | 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 |
017-02.pdf
This document is a legal response filed by Jeffrey Epstein's legal team on October 6, 2009, opposing a Motion to Compel discovery filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe No. 2. Epstein asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to refuse the production of photographs of his Palm Beach home (specifically massage rooms), financial records, tax returns, passport/travel records, and medical records from Dr. Stephan Alexander. The defense argues that despite the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), the threat of federal prosecution remains real and substantial, particularly in districts outside the Southern District of Florida, and that the act of producing these documents would be testimonial and incriminating.
016-02.pdf
This document is a Motion for No-Contact Order filed by Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and 102 against Jeffrey Epstein in the Southern District of Florida on May 22, 2009. The plaintiffs argue that despite a state plea agreement prohibiting contact, Epstein's counsel refused to confirm he would not contact federal victims. The filing includes exhibits of correspondence between attorneys and a transcript of the 2008 plea conference where Judge Pucillo explicitly defined 'indirect contact' to include Facebook and MySpace.
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.
036.pdf
A legal filing (Sur-Reply) by Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys arguing that Plaintiff Bradley Edwards must produce solicitation letters sent to former Epstein employees and their responses. The defense argues Edwards waived work-product privilege by failing to produce a privilege log and that the letters sent to third parties do not constitute work product.
024.pdf
This document is a legal notice filed by Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys on December 16, 2016, in the Southern District of Florida regarding a subpoena served on Bradley J. Edwards. Maxwell argues that rulings made by the Southern District of New York on a similar subpoena served on Paul Cassell (another attorney for Virginia Giuffre) should be binding (res judicata) on the Edwards subpoena. The filing includes a table comparing the requests in both subpoenas and the corresponding rulings from the SDNY court, asking the Florida court to issue a consistent order requiring production of certain documents and granting the motion to quash for others.
023.pdf
This document is a formal notice filed on December 16, 2016, in the Southern District of Florida, by attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell. It informs the court and opposing counsel (specifically Bradley J. Edwards' attorney Jack Scarola) that 'Exhibit B' related to a subpoena status notice has been filed under seal. The underlying case referenced is Virginia L. Giuffre v. Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of New York.
022.pdf
This document is a motion filed on December 16, 2016, by Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys in the Southern District of Florida. The motion requests permission to file 'Exhibit B' under seal, noting that the exhibit is a sealed order from the Southern District of New York in the underlying 'Giuffre v. Maxwell' case. The document lists legal counsel for Maxwell and for Bradley J. Edwards, who is the subject of a subpoena in this miscellaneous action.
015.pdf
This document is a Motion to Seal filed on July 7, 2016, by attorney Jack Scarola on behalf of Bradley J. Edwards in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Edwards seeks to seal exhibits attached to his Motion to Quash a subpoena, specifically referencing confidential depositions of Ghislaine Maxwell and Rinaldo Rizzo, as well as documents related to Alan Dershowitz, which are already under seal in the Southern District of New York. The motion argues that sealing is necessary to comply with protective orders from the underlying case.
013.pdf
This document is a reply filed by Bradley J. Edwards in support of his motion to quash a subpoena served on him by Ghislaine Maxwell in the case of Giuffre v. Maxwell. Edwards argues that the subpoena imposes an undue burden on him as a non-party and opposing counsel, seeking information that is already in Maxwell's possession, privileged, irrelevant, or available from other sources. The brief details the history of related litigation, including the CVRA case and a defamation suit against Alan Dershowitz, to support the argument that the subpoena is harassing and unnecessary.
013-02.pdf
This document is a Notice of Withdrawal of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed on April 8, 2016, in a Florida Circuit Court case between Bradley J. Edwards/Paul G. Cassell and Alan M. Dershowitz. The plaintiffs withdraw their motion pursuant to a confidential settlement agreement but explicitly state that their client, Virginia Giuffre, reaffirms her allegations and that the withdrawal is not an admission that her allegations were mistaken. They concede that filing certain allegations in a separate Crime Victims' Rights Act case was a 'tactical mistake' that caused distractions.
012.pdf
This document is a motion filed on July 7, 2016, in the Southern District of Florida by attorney Jack Scarola on behalf of Bradley J. Edwards. Edwards requests permission to file a reply exceeding the standard page limit (up to 25 pages) in support of his motion to quash a subpoena served by Ghislaine Maxwell. The motion explains that the extra length is necessary to address allegations made by Maxwell regarding Edwards' prior filings and alleged discovery withholding by his client, Virginia Giuffre.
010.pdf
Declaration by Jeffrey S. Pagliuca, attorney for Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on June 30, 2016, in the Southern District of Florida. The document lists 18 exhibits (A-R) supporting Maxwell's opposition to Bradley J. Edwards' motion to quash a subpoena. Several exhibits are filed under seal, while others include procedural documents from related cases (Cassell v. Dershowitz, Epstein v. Rothstein, Jane Doe v. US) and communications regarding discovery and subpoenas.
010-15.pdf
This document is a press release and joint statement dated April 8, 2016, announcing the settlement of a defamation lawsuit between Professor Alan Dershowitz and attorneys Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell. The attorneys acknowledged it was a mistake to have filed sexual misconduct accusations against Dershowitz on behalf of their client, Virginia Roberts, and withdrew those claims. Dershowitz withdrew his counterclaims regarding unethical conduct and reiterated his denial of the allegations, citing travel records as evidence of his absence during the alleged events.
010-06.pdf
This document is Plaintiff Virginia Giuffre's second amended supplemental response to discovery requests from Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell, dated April 29, 2016. It details Giuffre's legal representation history from 2009 to 2016, listing specific attorneys and cases including actions against Jeffrey Epstein, the US Government, and Alan Dershowitz. The document also contains objections to requests for financial records regarding payments from Epstein or media organizations, asserting attorney-client privilege and irrelevance.
010-05.pdf
This document is a civil complaint filed on January 6, 2015, in Broward County, Florida, by attorneys Bradley J. Edwards and Paul G. Cassell against Alan M. Dershowitz. The plaintiffs allege that Dershowitz defamed them in media interviews (specifically on CNN) by accusing them of misconduct and lying after they filed court pleadings alleging Dershowitz participated in Jeffrey Epstein's criminal conduct. The complaint asserts that Dershowitz's statements were false, malicious, and intended to distract from his own alleged involvement in Epstein's crimes and the negotiation of Epstein's non-prosecution agreement.
007.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Filing' submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on June 29, 2016. It serves to notify the court and opposing counsel that Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell has filed Exhibits A, G, H, I, and N under seal. These exhibits are attached to a declaration by her attorney, Jeffrey S. Pagliuca, in support of her opposition to Bradley J. Edwards' motion to quash a subpoena.
006.pdf
This document is a motion filed on June 29, 2016, by attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of Florida. The motion requests permission to file specific exhibits (A, G, H, I, and N) under seal because they were designated as confidential in the underlying case (Giuffre v. Maxwell) in the Southern District of New York. The document includes a certificate of service indicating the motion was served electronically to attorney Jack Scarola representing Bradley J. Edwards.
005.pdf
This document is a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice filed on June 29, 2016, in the Southern District of Florida. Attorney Denise D. Riley requests that attorney Jeffrey S. Pagliuca of the Colorado firm Haddon, Morgan and Foreman be admitted to represent Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell in matters related to a subpoena issued to Bradley J. Edwards. The document includes contact information for the attorneys involved and a certificate of service to opposing counsel Jack Scarola.
001-01.pdf
Legal declaration by attorney Bradley J. Edwards filed on June 13, 2016, in support of a motion to quash a subpoena from Ghislaine Maxwell. Edwards details his representation of Virginia Giuffre and the undue burden of reviewing over 200,000 emails for communications with journalists. He explicitly states that Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein share a joint defense agreement and mentions Giuffre's association with the organization 'Victims Refuse Silence, Inc.'
073.pdf
This document is a legal response filed on November 28, 2009, by Plaintiff Carolyn M. Andriano (Jane Doe No. 2) in her civil case against Jeffrey Epstein. The filing opposes a motion by third-party witness Igor Zinoview—Epstein's driver, bodyguard, and trainer since November 2005—who sought to avoid being deposed by claiming he had no knowledge of relevant facts. The Plaintiff argues that Zinoview must be deposed because he worked for Epstein during the active Palm Beach Police investigation (2005-2006) and likely possesses knowledge regarding activities at the Epstein residence, especially since Epstein himself invoked the Fifth Amendment.
071.pdf
A 2009 legal motion filed in the Southern District of Florida on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein requesting permission to attend mediation in a case involving Carolyn Andriano (C.M.A.). The motion notes that a prior 'no contact order' exists regarding Andriano, but states that neither she nor her counsel object to Epstein's presence at depositions, mediation, or trial. The document includes a comprehensive service list of attorneys involved in multiple related cases against Epstein.
069.pdf
This document is a legal motion filed on November 9, 2009, by Igor Zinoviev, a third-party witness and employee of Jeffrey Epstein, seeking a protective order to prevent or limit his deposition in the civil case 'Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein'. Zinoviev claims he has no relevant information for the civil cases as his employment with Epstein began in November 2005, after the period of the alleged misconduct, and he has not discussed Epstein's criminal or civil cases with him.
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.
032.pdf
This document is a legal reply filed on June 4, 2009, by Plaintiffs Jane Doe No. 101 and 102 in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiffs are requesting a court order prohibiting Jeffrey Epstein and his agents from contacting them directly or indirectly, citing his status as a convicted sex offender and their fear of intimidation. The document also includes a service list detailing the legal representation for various parties, including Bruce E. Reinhart representing co-defendant Sarah Kellen.
Edwards adv. Epstein Interview
Discussion regarding Virginia's comfort level in naming names and her travel history with Jeffrey Epstein.
[EXTERNAL] Re: EXTERNAL Rule 17(c) subpoena
Discussing privacy concerns regarding files and disclosures made to the Fund under confidentiality assurances.
Re: EXTERNAL Rule 17(c) subpoena
Informing Jack about a motion filed by Maxwell's counsel to subpoena the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund and stating intent to file a motion to quash.
Local Criminal Rule 23.1
Notification regarding a recent order from Judge Nathan concerning Local Criminal Rule 23.1, clarifying its application to attorneys associated with a case, such as attorneys for witnesses.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Notification regarding an attached order concerning the trial date for the Ghislaine Maxwell case.
RE Request for information
Sender provides a picture of a victim taken around the time of her abuse by Epstein. Mentions the victim recalls topless photos were taken which would be critical evidence.
Re: [Redacted]
Jack accepts the news and pledges support.
Funding Confirmation
Confirms SDNY can pay for the witness, husband, and three minor children to travel to NY and for a hotel suite.
RE: [Redacted]
AUSA thanks Jack and confirms they will work with FBI Victim Services to figure out funding logistics.
Follow up
Asking for an update, noting steps needed to expand the case to include the witness's testimony.
Re: [Redacted]
Confirms witness is willing to testify but requires her husband and children to travel with her. Requests government commitment for funding travel.
Re: [Redacted]
Jack confirms he is scheduled to conference with the witness tomorrow afternoon.
Checking in
AUSA checking if the witness has made a decision about testifying. Mentions a recent trip to Florida.
RE: [Redacted] - Discovery Responses
Attached please find the Discovery Responses filed on [Redacted] behalf in her civil matter against Epstein.
Re: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Jack confirms he is available right now.
RE: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Discussing contact with Epstein Estate attorneys (Weinstein and Tomback) regarding the release of the transcript. Confirms limited details were shared about Scarola's client.
Re: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Asking about protective orders in the civil suit that might govern disclosure.
Re: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Inquiry about whether a protective order exists in the civil suit that would govern disclosing materials.
Re: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Stating he is unaware of any protective order relating to the CMA case.
Re: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Jack states he is unaware of any protective order relating to the case.
RE: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Acknowledging receipt of email; mentioning they will reach out to the adversary to ask for a copy of the deposition.
Re: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Asking if USANYS was able to locate the transcript.
Re: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Stating they will likely reach out to the adversary in the deposition to ask for a copy.
Fwd: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Forwarding confirmation that the deposition transcript cannot be found. Attaching notes from paralegal Mike Danchuk instead.
Fwd: 12/04/09 [Redacted] vs Epstein Deposition Transcript
Informing USANYS that the original deposition transcript and video are lost; attaching paralegal notes instead; commenting on the nature of the testimony regarding Epstein's victims.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity