Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-28264House OversightOther

Alleged Joint Defense Agreement Involving Alan Dershowitz, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Epstein‑related investigations

The passage hints at a possible joint‑defense pact between high‑profile figures (Dershowitz, Maxwell, Epstein) that could shield privileged communications from disclosure. If true, it would provide a Dershowitz references a 'joint defense agreement' involving parties of interest to the DA and federa He admits uncertainty about the agreement and offers to check records. Mr. Edwards questions wheth

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #011421
Pages
1
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage hints at a possible joint‑defense pact between high‑profile figures (Dershowitz, Maxwell, Epstein) that could shield privileged communications from disclosure. If true, it would provide a Dershowitz references a 'joint defense agreement' involving parties of interest to the DA and federa He admits uncertainty about the agreement and offers to check records. Mr. Edwards questions wheth

Tags

jeffrey-epsteincourt-testimonylegal-privilegelegal-strategyghislaine-maxwelljoint-defense-agreementpotential-evidence-concealmentalan-dershowitzmoderate-importancehouse-oversightfinancialcriminal-misconductprivilege

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
10 id. 12 13 14 L5 16 ne) 18 life) 20 21 22 23 24 25 118 H3vlgiu2 There's a little bit more colloquy, and then Mr. Dershowitz says: "This is a long time ago. My recollection is that very early on there was a joint defense agreement between several of the people who were of interest to the district attorney and to the federal government. That's my recollection. And I would only want to resolve doubts in favor of privilege." Then Mr. Dershowitz says: "We can check further. I would be happy to answer the question if it's not privileged." That's the testimony that they say supports their assertion of this joint defense agreement with Alan Dershowitz. But there's more, your Honor. Mr. Edwards -- again, who is a party in this deposition and not a lawyer -- chimes in to the special master and Mr. Dershowitz: "OQ. Ghislaine Maxwell was never the target of the investigation, was she?" Confirming and arguing that Dershowitz is wrong about this joint defense agreement at the time. And Dershowitz is admitting that he doesn't really know and we should check and we'll get back and people can ask these questions if I'm wrong about this agreement. They also take liberty with Ms. Maxwell's discussion in her deposition about her knowledge about what happened to Mr. Epstein and what he pled guilty to. When you look at those pages of the transcript, you know, she says, I know he went to jail, and then there's a back-and-forth between Ms. McCawley and Ms. Maxwell about what did he go to jail for, and SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

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

Phone(212) 805-0300

Related Documents (6)

House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Court filing alleges Alan Dershowitz and Prince Andrew forced minor Jane Doe #3 into sexual acts on multiple trips with Epstein

The passage provides specific allegations linking a high‑profile U.S. lawyer and a senior British royal to sexual abuse of a minor, citing locations, travel itineraries, and a formal court pleading. T Alleged sexual abuse of Jane Doe #3 by Alan Dershowitz on private planes and in multiple jurisdictio Alleged sexual abuse of Jane Doe #3 by Prince Andrew in London, New York, and on Epstein’s U.S. Vi

1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

SE?Oet

M SE?Oet ASO Se , R‘N)C% 5C>CUMC- 7- f9 kCseriA/C GteCC Hi t\iCt :5122122, 1:31 PM --7—Jmrerepstent—galepedts Epstein a massage". She claims she was taken to his mansion, Perversion of Justice, Miami Herald, where he exposed himself and had sexual intercourse with i November 3O, 2018. her, and paid her $2OO immediately afterward0161 A similar $50-million suit was filed in March 2008, by a different woman, who was represented by the same lawyer EL-29i These and several similar lawsuits were dismissal Ea°1 All other lawsuits have been settled by Epstein out of court: b$11 Epstein made many out-of-court settlements with alleged victims.0.21 Victims' rights: Jane Does v. United States (2014) A December 3o, 2014, federal civil suit was filed in Florida by Jane Doe 1 ) and Jane Doe 2 against the United States for violations of the Crime Victims' Rietts Act by the U.S. Department of Justice's NPA with Epstein and his limited 2008 state plea. There was a later unsucc

17p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01683110

0p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing,

Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos £t Lehrman, P.L. 'Ovid Pam ftoisl pet WWW.PATITTOJUSTKE.COM 425 North Andrews Avenue • Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 4 00 "ti e 6.‘ tk i r atire CalkAllfle alvdtr aIINNEV rar ,NYTTENNINIP PITNEY 'OWES 02 !F $003 , 50 0 000i3V, wit JAN 2i 2,2!3 .a4P En M ZIP t20-12E 3330 Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafatia 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 EFTA00191396 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, 1. UNITED STATES, Respondent. SEALED DOCUMENT EFTA00191397 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, UNITED STATES, Respondent. SEALED DOCUMENT MOTION TO SEAL Petitioners Jane Doc No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2, joined by movants Jane Doe No. 3 and Jane Doe No. 4, move to file the attached pleading and supporti

71p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01401218

0p
Court UnsealedAug 9, 2019

Maxwell Disputes

Case 18-2868, Document 284, 08/09/2019, 2628244, Page1 of 38 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------X Plaintiff, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. -------------------------------------------------- ............................................. VIRGINIA L. GIUFFRE, 15-cv-07433-RWS Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Statement of Contested Facts and Plaintiff’s “Undisputed Facts” Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 56.1 Laura A. M

38p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.