1 duplicate copy in the archive
Deposition Transcript of Bradley J. Edwards in Jeffrey Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein Litigation (Palm Beach, FL)
The document provides a formal deposition record linking Jeffrey Epstein to a civil case against Scott Rothstein and other defendants, confirming the existence of litigation and identifying attorneys Deposition taken on March 23, 2010 in a case titled Jeffrey Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein, Bradley J. Identifies plaintiff’s counsel Robert D. Critton, Jr. and defendant’s counsel Jack Alan Goldberger
Summary
The document provides a formal deposition record linking Jeffrey Epstein to a civil case against Scott Rothstein and other defendants, confirming the existence of litigation and identifying attorneys Deposition taken on March 23, 2010 in a case titled Jeffrey Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein, Bradley J. Identifies plaintiff’s counsel Robert D. Critton, Jr. and defendant’s counsel Jack Alan Goldberger
Persons Referenced (3)
“rch 23, 20010 10:00 - 5:07 p.m. PLAINTIFF'S EX. 1 ALFREDO RODRIGUEZ 211 CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 2139 Palm Beach Lakes; Bou”
Bradley Edwards“Media Number One in the videotaped deposition of Bradley Edwards in the matter of Jeffrey Epstein versus Scott Rot”
Jeffrey Epstein“XXMB AG - Complex Litigation, Fla.R.Civ.Pro. 1201 JEFFREY EPSTEIN, EXAMINATION DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT Plaintiff, “ye”
Tags
Ask AI About This Document
Extracted Text (OCR)
Technical Artifacts (7)
View in Artifacts BrowserEmail addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.
fla.r.civ.pro(561) 832-7500(561) 832-7506401-5012561.659.8300561.686.6300561.842.2820Related Documents (6)
Deposition Transcript of Bradley J. Edwards in Jeffrey Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein Litigation (Palm Beach, FL)
Deposition Transcript of Bradley J. Edwards in Jeffrey Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein Litigation (Palm Beach, FL) The document provides a formal deposition record linking Jeffrey Epstein to a civil case against Scott Rothstein and other defendants, confirming the existence of litigation and identifying attorneys and parties involved. While it does not contain substantive allegations or financial details, it offers a concrete lead for investigators to obtain the full testimony, which may contain undisclosed claims about Epstein's activities or connections. The source is a court filing, giving it credibility, but the excerpt itself lacks direct evidence of misconduct. Key insights: Deposition taken on March 23, 2010 in a case titled Jeffrey Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein, Bradley J. Edwards, and L.M.; Identifies plaintiff’s counsel Robert D. Critton, Jr. and defendant’s counsel Jack Alan Goldberger.; Mentions court reporter Cynthia Hopkins and videographer Joe Kozak, indicating a recorded transcript exists.
Attorney Bradley Edwards alleges Jeffrey Epstein's non‑prosecution agreement, 5th Amendment tactics, and a unique George Rush tape as key evidence in Jane Doe civil suits
Attorney Bradley Edwards alleges Jeffrey Epstein's non‑prosecution agreement, 5th Amendment tactics, and a unique George Rush tape as key evidence in Jane Doe civil suits 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 unique recorded interview (the "Rush tape") that could contain admissions and perjury evidence. If verified, these points link high‑profile figures (Epstein, Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, Ghislaine Maxwell) and suggest possible obstruction of justice and evidence suppression, providing concrete leads for further FOIA, subpoena, and criminal perjury investigations. Key insights: Epstein secured a federal non‑prosecution agreement that barred criminal charges for ~30 victims in exchange for a state plea.; All co‑defendants and Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment, leaving plaintiffs with no substantive testimony.; Attorney claims a George Rush interview contains Epstein’s admissions of liability and lack of remorse, potentially usable for perjury charges.
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
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.
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
[REDACTED - Survivor] v. Alan Dershowitz – Allegations of Sex Trafficking, NPA Manipulation, and Defamation
The complaint provides a dense web of alleged connections between Alan Dershowitz, Jeffrey Epstein, former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, and the 2008 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA). It cites specif Roberts alleges she was trafficked by Epstein from 2000‑2002 and forced to have sex with Dershowitz. Dershowitz is accused of helping draft and pressure the government into the 2008 NPA that shielded
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.