Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-24681House OversightDeposition

Deposition excerpt suggests possible concealment of involvement in Epstein cases by senior witness

The passage contains sworn testimony where a witness is asked to assume that a colleague (Brad Edwards) had knowledge of illegal activity in the Epstein matters and that the witness may have concealed Witness repeatedly denies knowledge of any input or contact with Epstein plaintiffs. Questioning focuses on whether the witness concealed Brad Edwards' alleged participation in illegal Witness ackno

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #017521
Pages
2
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage contains sworn testimony where a witness is asked to assume that a colleague (Brad Edwards) had knowledge of illegal activity in the Epstein matters and that the witness may have concealed Witness repeatedly denies knowledge of any input or contact with Epstein plaintiffs. Questioning focuses on whether the witness concealed Brad Edwards' alleged participation in illegal Witness ackno

Tags

legal-strategyobstructionobstruction-of-justicedepositionprocedural-delaylegal-exposuremoderate-importancehouse-oversightsummary-judgmentepsteincourt-proceedingspotential-witness-tampering

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
ara ana ons WNP INO PE NO UE NO NOE OE NO i a Ow wnrF OW OTHE BWDHHE COW rFPoOowWwWmnA DO SB WN FE oe t Ww DR NNMNNNNNPFPFPRP EP RP RF EB Oe WrhyrPreowwmnonnrntA nan uw of a single deposition, or the propounding of any discovery in the Epstein cases. Do you have any i reason to doubt the accuracy of that testimony? A. No, sir, Q. l_want you. to assume that Brad has or will testify that you did not provide any input whatsoever into the handling of the Jegitimate Epstein cases. Do you have any reason whatsoever to doubt the accuracy of that testimony? A. No, sir. Q. |] want you to assume that Brad has or will 2 ENE YOU 10 eee at 2rd he we testify that you never met any of the legitimate plaintiffs in the Epstein cases. Do you _have a reason to doubt the accuracy of that testimony? A. No, sir. MS. HADDAD: ]'m going to object to these same questions you keep asking, because Mr. Rothstein has testified at nauseam that he doesn't recal] any of this and now you are asking him to bolster Mr. Edwards’ either already given or purported 4 testimony when he's testified he doesn't recall it. : BY MR. SCAROLA: | Q. | want you to assume that Brad has or will testify under oath that you never asked him once to report back to you on any factual matters repardi Page 122 " the Epstein case. Do you have any reason to doubt the accuracy of that testimony? A. No, sir. Q. 1] want you to assume that Brad has testified repeatedly that he had absolutely no involvement i in or ‘Knowledge of an ie il activity d any other RRA la Do you have any 1 reason to doubt the accuracy of that testimony? A. No, sir. Q. J want to talk to you briefly about your personal perceptions of the significance of the testimony that you are giving today. If Brad Edwards had, in fact, been a participant in any of the illegal ‘activities that you have been questioned about at any stage of this very lengthy deposition. and you knowingly concealed Brad Edwards’ participation, what do you understand the personal consequences to be as a conset q uence of your having knowingly concealed Brad Edwards participation? A. I'l] be violating my agreement with the United States government and ] would run the risk of dying in prison, Q. If Brad Edwards, contrary to what you have testified under oath and what Brad himself has repeatedly said, knew about anything having to do with Page 123 santero rast ES PRR cE TT GEN AN USOT SEN SASS SRA U HG SHAE ORR ARR OB PEND Ea seater emcee conseUenees of that false testimony to be to be? A. J'll be violating my agreement with the United States government and ] would run the risk of. dying in prison, MR. SCAROLA: Thank you. | don't have any further questions. THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir. MR. NURIK: Mark, 1 don't know what your time frame is on your hitigation, but the ability to receive the transcript, review it and prepare an errata sheet within what is normally the time allotted under the court rules cannot be accomplished in this case. MR. GOLDBERGER: How much time are you generally -- MR. NURIK: | don't know. Actually, the first set of errata sheets have just been prepared and finalized for the first deposition in December. I'm not suggesting it will take that long this time, but if you can give me an idea of what your time responsibilities are with the court, what the time limits are -- Page 124 moreno MR. GOLDBERGER: Do you think it will be less than a month, two months? MR. NURIK: J don't think it will be jess than a month. First of all, a lot depends on the ability to get the transcript to him to review. MR. GOLDBERGER: Right. MR. NURIK: And that's a whole procedure, it's not normal circumstances that we are dealing with. MR. GOLDBERGER: If time becomes an issue, we'll approach you and ask you to expedite. MR. SCAROLA: Mark, ] will tell that from our perspective time is an issue. MR. NURIK: Have at it then, Jack. Do what you need to do to get it done. MR. SCAROLA: There is a long pending motion for summary judgment on Brad’s behalf that has been delayed for purposes of taking this deposition. We are very anxious to be able to call that motion for summary judgment up for hearing, so whatever can be done reasonably to expedite the preparation of this portion of this transcript would be appreciated. We understand there are limitations beyond your control, but to the extent you can do it, that would be helpful. Thank you. Page 125 32 (Pages 122 to 125) FRIEDMAN, LOMBARDI & OLSON 305-371-6677 5ed93085-0554-447f-bcdd-ca2d8fe941 df

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Phone305-371-6677

Related Documents (6)

House OversightUnknown

Rothstein Deposition Reveals Use of Jeffrey Epstein Case to Fuel Ponzi Scheme and Possible High‑Profile Name Manipulation

Rothstein Deposition Reveals Use of Jeffrey Epstein Case to Fuel Ponzi Scheme and Possible High‑Profile Name Manipulation The transcript provides multiple concrete leads: (1) Rothstein admits the firm used the Epstein case to attract investors for a Ponzi scheme; (2) mentions specific high‑profile individuals (Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew) allegedly on flight manifests used to impress investors; (3) identifies Russell Adler, Ken Jenne, and a former federal agent (Cara Holmes) as key conspirators; (4) cites a filed federal complaint on July 24 2009 signed by Brad Edwards, linking him directly to the scheme; (5) details internal surveillance, fund‑raising, and financial commingling practices. These points suggest actionable investigative steps—reviewing the July 24 complaint, tracing the alleged flight manifest, examining financial records for commingled funds, and interviewing the named officials. The involvement of a billionaire, former politicians, and law‑enforcement contacts makes the lead both controversial and potentially explosive. Key insights: Rothstein confirms the Epstein case was leveraged to lure investors into a Ponzi scheme.; Reference to a flight manifest allegedly listing Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew, used as a sales tool.; Russell Adler identified as a co‑conspirator who supplied case details and connections.

1p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Rothstein Deposition Reveals Use of Jeffrey Epstein Case to Fuel Ponzi Scheme and Possible High‑Profile Name Manipulation

The transcript provides multiple concrete leads: (1) Rothstein admits the firm used the Epstein case to attract investors for a Ponzi scheme; (2) mentions specific high‑profile individuals (Bill Clint Rothstein confirms the Epstein case was leveraged to lure investors into a Ponzi scheme. Reference to a flight manifest allegedly listing Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew, used as a sales too Russell A

71p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Attorney Bradley Edwards alleges Jeffrey Epstein's non‑prosecution agreement, 5th Amendment tactics, and a unique George Rush tape as key evidence ...

The affidavit details a non‑prosecution agreement that shielded Epstein from federal charges, claims that Epstein repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment to block discovery, and describes a purportedly Epstein secured a federal non‑prosecution agreement that barred criminal charges for ~30 victims in All co‑defendants and Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment, leaving plaintiffs with no substantive

23p
House OversightUnknown

Deposition excerpt suggests possible concealment of involvement in Epstein cases by senior witness

Deposition excerpt suggests possible concealment of involvement in Epstein cases by senior witness The passage contains sworn testimony where a witness is asked to assume that a colleague (Brad Edwards) had knowledge of illegal activity in the Epstein matters and that the witness may have concealed that knowledge. It hints at potential obstruction, a breach of a government agreement, and possible criminal exposure. While the text does not name high‑level officials beyond the deposition participants, it provides concrete names (Brad Edwards, Mr. Rothstein, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Scarola, Mr. Nurik, Mr. Goldberger) and references a pending summary‑judgment motion, offering actionable leads for further document review and witness follow‑up. Key insights: Witness repeatedly denies knowledge of any input or contact with Epstein plaintiffs.; Questioning focuses on whether the witness concealed Brad Edwards' alleged participation in illegal activity.; Witness acknowledges that concealment could violate an agreement with the U.S. government and result in imprisonment.

1p
House OversightJan 17, 2014

Bradley Edwards’ Opposition to Jeffrey Epstein’s Summary Judgment Motion – Claims of Abuse of Process, Witness Tampering, and Links to High‑Profile Figures

Bradley Edwards’ Opposition to Jeffrey Epstein’s Summary Judgment Motion – Claims of Abuse of Process, Witness Tampering, and Links to High‑Profile Figures The filing enumerates numerous specific leads that, if verified, tie Jeffrey Epstein to a wide network of powerful individuals (Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, Ghislaine Maxwell, etc.) and to alleged obstruction of federal investigations, witness intimidation, and a non‑prosecution agreement. It also references concrete documents (exhibits, deposition excerpts, flight logs, FBI emails) that could be pursued for forensic analysis, discovery requests, or FOIA requests. The combination of high‑profile actors, alleged criminal conduct, and detailed procedural allegations makes this a strong investigative lead. Key insights: Edwards alleges Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering substantive questions, creating adverse inferences.; The motion cites a “Holy Grail” journal allegedly listing underage victims and high‑profile contacts (Trump, Clinton, etc.).; Claims that Epstein’s attorneys (including Alan Dershowitz) may have helped suppress victim testimony and influence the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

1p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Bradley Edwards’ Opposition to Jeffrey Epstein’s Summary Judgment Motion – Claims of Abuse of Process, Witness Tampering, and Links to High‑Profile...

The filing enumerates numerous specific leads that, if verified, tie Jeffrey Epstein to a wide network of powerful individuals (Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, Ghislaine Maxwell, etc.) an Edwards alleges Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering substantive questions, creati The motion cites a “Holy Grail” journal allegedly listing underage victims and high‑profile contac

84p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.