Case caption: Edwards, Bradley vs. Dershowitz
Case title 'Edwards, Bradley vs. Dershowitz' and mention of opposing defamation claims.
Parties in the lawsuit Edwards vs. Dershowitz.
Parties in lawsuit; Dershowitz threatens disbarment and defamation suit.
Edwards is the plaintiff in the suit against Dershowitz.
Opposing parties in lawsuit; Dershowitz threatens disbarment.
Complaint by Edwards that Dershowitz's accusations against him were false and defamatory.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015623.jpg
This document is page 3 of a legal response filed by Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell against Alan Dershowitz's Motion to Determine Confidentiality of Court Records. The text outlines legal exceptions for confidentiality under Florida Judicial Administration rules, arguing that none apply because the case is a defamation action where disclosure is inherent to the proceedings. The filing cites precedents such as Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers and Carnegie v. Tedder to support the argument that defamatory material cannot be sealed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015631.jpg
This document is page 11 of a legal response in the case of Edwards vs. Dershowitz (Case No. CACE 15-000072). Attorneys Edwards and Cassell argue against sealing court records, claiming that Alan Dershowitz selectively reveals confidential information to misrepresent facts while trying to prevent them from correcting the record. The text specifically cites a deposition where Dershowitz allegedly brought up an affidavit by Virginia Giuffre regarding him watching her perform oral sex on Jeffrey Epstein, and subsequently misrepresented settlement discussions involving attorney David Boies.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015634.jpg
This document is page 14 of a legal response filed by Edwards and Cassell in the case Edwards v. Dershowitz. The text argues that Dershowitz selectively uses parts of Virginia Giuffre's affidavit while attempting to seal the rest, preventing a fair assessment of his claims that her statements are 'preposterous.' The document includes a transcript of a BBC interview from January 2015 where Dershowitz categorically denies the allegations, claims he does not know Giuffre, and threatens the opposing lawyers with defamation suits and disbarment proceedings.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015625.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal response filed by Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell in a lawsuit against Alan Dershowitz. The text argues that Dershowitz cannot seal court records containing allegations that he sexually abused Jane Doe #3, particularly because he previously quoted those same allegations in his own counterclaim. It further alleges that Dershowitz, as Epstein's lawyer, negotiated a Non-Prosecution Agreement specifically to secure immunity for himself and other coconspirators regarding crimes committed in Florida.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015635.jpg
This page is from a legal response by Edwards and Cassell against Dershowitz (Case CACE 15-000072). It documents Dershowitz's public media statements in January 2015 (on the Today Show and in the Miami Herald) where he categorically denies allegations, claims an 'academic relationship' with Epstein, and accuses the opposing lawyers and Ms. Giuffre of lying and fabrication. He specifically threatens that the lawyers will be disbarred and will 'rue the day' they filed the motion.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022056.jpg
This document consists of pages 248-249 from the book 'Filthy Rich', stamped as evidence for House Oversight. The text details a victim's (likely Virginia Roberts) account of being contacted by a 'supposed FBI agent' who she realized was actually working for Epstein. It describes a subsequent call with Epstein and his lawyer where she was intimidated into promising silence to protect her safety. The text also discusses the legal fallout involving Alan Dershowitz and Bradley Edwards regarding defamation claims stemming from these allegations.
Entities connected to both Bradley Edwards and Alan Dershowitz
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein relationship