JANE DOE NO. 3
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Y. Doe
|
Same person |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Haley Robson
|
Recruiter recruit |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Herman
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Subject of testimony statements |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
|
Accused accuser |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Abuser victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
|
Alleged connection denial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Al Gore
|
Alleged connection via subpoena |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Bill Clinton
|
Alleged connection via subpoena |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Victim trafficker |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jessica Arbour
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Bill Clinton
|
Alleged meeting |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Al Gore
|
Alleged meeting |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Alan M. Dershowitz
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Paul Cassell
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Adversarial threatening |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Defendant plaintiff abuser victim context |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Sexual Trafficking | Unknown | View |
| N/A | Relocation | Jane Doe No. 3 moved to New York City from a small town to pursue a modeling career. | New York City | View |
| N/A | Meeting | Jane Doe No. 3 was introduced to Mr. Epstein by an unnamed female. | Mr. Epstein's New York home | View |
| N/A | N/A | Florida Defamation Action | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Alleged sexual assault/massage incident. | Epstein's Palm Beach mansion | View |
| N/A | Legal filing | A request for a protective order was filed, asking that the deposition in a criminal case and a c... | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Issuance of Subpoena to Jane Doe No. 3 | Unspecified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3 (limited to 4 hours). | Offices of Boies, Schiller ... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Alleged meeting between Jane Doe No. 3, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore (disputed relevance). | Little Saint James Island, ... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition of Jane Doe No. 3 | Offices of Boies, Schiller ... | View |
| 2019-09-03 | Court hearing | Victims provide statements in a court proceeding related to Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. | N/A | View |
| 2015-11-02 | N/A | Court consideration of motions to quash subpoenas. | Circuit Court of the 17th J... | View |
| 2015-01-19 | N/A | Date of a Declaration referenced in Request no. 1. | Federal Court (implied) | View |
| 2009-11-24 | N/A | Jeffrey Epstein violated court orders by appearing at 250 S. Australian Ave during Jane Doe No. 3... | 250 S. Australian Avenue, W... | View |
| 2008-03-05 | N/A | Jane Doe No. 3 files federal lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein. | West Palm Beach | View |
| 1999-01-01 | N/A | Time period specified in subpoena request regarding payments from Epstein | Unknown | View |
017-01.pdf
This document is a Motion to Compel Answers to Plaintiff's First Request for Production filed by Jane Doe in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against Jeffrey Epstein. The plaintiff argues that Epstein's blanket invocation of Fifth Amendment privileges to refuse producing documents (such as phone records, tax returns, and correspondence) is improper and that he should be compelled to answer or provide a privilege log. The motion details specific discovery requests and Epstein's uniform response asserting his constitutional rights against self-incrimination.
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.
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.
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.
045.pdf
This document is a Motion to Compel filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe against Jeffrey Epstein on July 10, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiff lists 23 specific interrogatories regarding Epstein's finances, properties, travel, and alleged sexual abuse of minors, all of which Epstein refused to answer by invoking his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. The motion argues that Epstein's blanket refusals are improper and requests the court force him to answer or provide a privilege log.
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.
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.
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.
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).
064.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Compliance' filed on July 28, 2009, by Jeffrey Epstein's legal team in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. It pertains to multiple civil cases filed by 'Jane Doe' plaintiffs against Epstein. The filing states that while the court ordered the parties to agree on a preservation of evidence order, they were unable to reach a full agreement, leading Epstein to submit his own proposed order. The document includes a comprehensive service list detailing the attorneys representing the various plaintiffs and defendants, including Sarah Kellen.
064-01.pdf
This document is a Court Order from the Southern District of Florida (Exhibit A), signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra, granting a motion to preserve evidence in multiple civil cases against Jeffrey Epstein. The order mandates that Epstein and his agents preserve a wide range of materials, specifically including records of domestic and international travel on private airplanes, phone communications, computer data, and items resulting from the October 25, 2005 search of his Palm Beach home. It establishes preservation timelines ranging from 1998 to 2005 depending on the specific plaintiff and defines sanctions for wrongful destruction of evidence.
061.pdf
This document is a Motion to Compel filed on July 10, 2009, in the Southern District of Florida by Plaintiff Jane Doe against Defendant Jeffrey Epstein. The motion seeks to force Epstein to answer 23 specific Requests for Admission regarding his net worth (specifically if it exceeds $1 billion), his financial support of modeling agency MC2, his ownership of Caribbean property, and specific allegations of sexual battery, assault, and sex trafficking of minors. Epstein had previously refused to answer these questions by invoking his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
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.
034.pdf
This document is a response filed by the United States Government (as amicus curiae) in May 2009 opposing Jeffrey Epstein's motion to stay various civil lawsuits against him. The government argues that there are no 'special circumstances' justifying a stay because Epstein is not currently under indictment, and the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was intended to facilitate restitution for victims, not to shield Epstein from civil discovery. The filing lists numerous related civil cases involving Jane Doe plaintiffs and emphasizes that staying the cases would prejudice the victims' rights to speedy proceedings and restitution.
033.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Limited Appearance' filed by the United States government in the Southern District of Florida on May 29, 2009. The filing, signed by Assistant US Attorney A. Marie Villafaña under US Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, consolidates multiple civil cases against Jeffrey Epstein (Plaintiffs include various Jane Does and C.M.A.). The United States enters as Amicus Curiae solely to respond to a court order regarding Epstein's Motion to Stay Proceedings, explicitly stating it does not become a party to the litigation nor take a position on the outcome of the civil suits.
028-03.pdf
This document is a Court Order from the Southern District of Florida dated May 26, 2009, granting a motion by Plaintiffs (Jane Doe No. 101 and 102) to preserve evidence in their cases against Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Kenneth A. Marra orders Epstein to preserve a wide range of materials, specifically including flight logs ('travel in Defendant's private airplanes'), phone records, computer data since 1998, financial records regarding payments to victims, and evidence related to the October 25, 2005 police search of his Palm Beach mansion. The order explicitly forbids the destruction, deletion, or alteration of any such evidence.
023.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Filing Withdrawal of Previously Raised Objections' filed on May 20, 2009, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Plaintiff C.M.A. withdraws her objections to Jeffrey Epstein's motion to compel her to identify herself by her legal name in the case style and third-party subpoenas, though she maintains her objection to the case being dismissed sua sponte. The document lists numerous related cases involving Jane Doe plaintiffs and provides a service list of attorneys involved.
019.pdf
This document is a consolidated court order from the Southern District of Florida dated May 14, 2009, covering multiple civil lawsuits (Jane Does, C.M.A., etc.) against Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Kenneth A. Marra requests the United States government provide its official position regarding Epstein's motion to stay these civil cases. Epstein argued that defending himself in these civil suits might violate his Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with the USAO and subject him to criminal prosecution.
018.pdf
This document is a court order dated May 14, 2009, from the Southern District of Florida, consolidating eleven separate civil cases against Jeffrey Epstein for the purposes of discovery and procedural motions. Judge Kenneth A. Marra designates 'Jane Doe No. 2 v. Epstein' as the lead case for filings and sets strict limits on depositions to prevent duplication, ruling that defendants and common witnesses may be deposed only once across all cases. The order aims to improve judicial economy and efficiency in handling the multiple lawsuits filed by various Jane Does and other plaintiffs.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | Media/Publishers | JANE DOE NO. 3 | $0.00 | Subpoena Request no. 18 seeks documents regardi... | View |
| N/A | Paid | JANE DOE NO. 3 | Boies, Schiller &... | $0.00 | Legal retainer fees and agreements (referenced ... | View |
| 2008-03-05 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | JANE DOE NO. 3 | $50,000,000.00 | Damages sought in federal lawsuit (more than $5... | View |
| 2004-01-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | JANE DOE NO. 3 | $0.00 | Money for massage | View |
| 1999-01-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | JANE DOE NO. 3 | $0.00 | Subpoena Request no. 20 seeks documents showing... | View |
Request no. 25
Request for documents concerning retention of Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP
Statements regarding Epstein/Dershowitz/Prince Andrew
Hypothetical statements discussed in the context of discovery requests
Document Requests
Included 25 separate document requests, including requests regarding Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and personal diaries.
Legal Counsel
Referenced as Category 4 of documents sought by Defendant.
Affidavit of Jane Doe No. 3
Cited as Exhibit 8.
Age instruction
When he asks how old you are, tell him 18 or 19 years old.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity