Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00206833DOJ Data Set 9Other

Subject: FW: (draft) Pleadings to Be Filed Tomorrow -- RE JEFFREY EPSTEIN

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00206833
Pages
2
Persons
6
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Subject: FW: (draft) Pleadings to Be Filed Tomorrow -- RE JEFFREY EPSTEIN Date: The, 26 Oct 2010 21:02:25 +0000 Importance: Normal Attachments: motion-finding-violation3.doc; edwards-affidavit-cvra3.doc; response-order-show- cause.docx Good afternoon, everyone. So much for my telephone call this morning. Judge Cassell has apparently taken a different point of view. Please see below and attached. Assistant U.S. Attorney West Palm Beach, FL 33401 From: Paul Cassell [mailto Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 4:49 PM To: SAFLS Cc: (USAFLS); Brad Edwards Subject: (draft) ea ings to Be Filed Tomorrow Dear M, I wanted to send you drafts of the pleadings we are in the process of preparing to file tomorrow, pursuant to Judge Marra's order. As mentioned in several previous e-mails, we stand ready to work with you to try and narrow the range of disputed facts — and trust that you will be willing to stipulate to all the facts that are correct in our pleadings. (Most of them are n

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009
Ask AI about this document

Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Subject: FW: (draft) Pleadings to Be Filed Tomorrow -- RE JEFFREY EPSTEIN Date: The, 26 Oct 2010 21:02:25 +0000 Importance: Normal Attachments: motion-finding-violation3.doc; edwards-affidavit-cvra3.doc; response-order-show- cause.docx Good afternoon, everyone. So much for my telephone call this morning. Judge Cassell has apparently taken a different point of view. Please see below and attached. Assistant U.S. Attorney West Palm Beach, FL 33401 From: Paul Cassell [mailto Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 4:49 PM To: SAFLS Cc: (USAFLS); Brad Edwards Subject: (draft) ea ings to Be Filed Tomorrow Dear M, I wanted to send you drafts of the pleadings we are in the process of preparing to file tomorrow, pursuant to Judge Marra's order. As mentioned in several previous e-mails, we stand ready to work with you to try and narrow the range of disputed facts — and trust that you will be willing to stipulate to all the facts that are correct in our pleadings. (Most of them are now based on documented e-mails, so we trust the bulk of the facts will gain your stipulated approval.) I am also writing because co-counsel Brad Edwards has been working with a possible approach to the filings tomorrow. AtMs suggestion, Brad has offered to take out a paragraph that Marea was concerned about in our fact section and to file our pleadings under seal tomorrow for, say, a period of (at least) two weeks. This would give us an opportunity to work with you to resolve disputed facts and, more generally, to try and resolve the entire dispute. In exchange, we request that you agree not to file a motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution and not to argue that we need to file some sort of civil complaint to litigate these issues (both suggestions you raised in your earlier e-mail). Brad and I don't believe such arguments would be legally well founded in any event. But if you are asking for concessions on our part, we would like to narrow the subjects of the litigation that we have to respond to in exchange. As we have mentioned at every stage of this case, we stand ready to work with you to try and resolve the matter. We continue to be willing to attempt a fair resolution that protects our client's interests. Along those lines, if you have concerns about us filing our pleadings under seal tomorrow, we are ready to discuss the idea of delaying any filing for a period of, say, two weeks. Such a delay, however, would be contingent on your obtaining an extension from Judge Marra of our filing deadline. As you can see, we are ready to file and would delay only as an accommodation to you — and would except you to do the motion that would be required for such an extension). EFTA00206833 Brad and I stand ready to discuss these issues at any time with you and/or Sincerely, Paul Cassell Counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 801-201-8271 (cell phone) Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0730 http://www.law.utah.edu/profiles/default.asp?PersonID=S7&name=Cassell Paul CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you. EFTA00206834

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: Re: Government's Position on Page Limits

From: To: Cc: Subject: Re: Government's Position on Page Limits Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 01:46:34 +0000 Importance: Normal Paul, You are welcome. The Southern District of Florida Local Rules do not distinguish between civil and criminal proceedings when it comes to the page length of a memorandum of law. S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(c)(2) limits a legal memorandum to twenty pages. The government has no objection to petitioners seeking leave to file a legal memorandum exceeding the page limitation by approximately fifteen pages. From: Paul Cassell Sent: Thursda March 17, 2011 08:40 PM To: Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: Government's Position on Page Limits Dear 1. Thank you for the information sent today. 2. What is the Government's position on the page limits applicable to our "summary judgment" pleading — do you believe we are under the civil rules? Or under the criminal rules? Do you believe that we need to file a separate motion for a roughly 35 page pleading with roughly 19 pa

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 1 of 64

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 1 of 64 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE No. 1 and JANE DOE No. 2 v. UNITED STATES AFFIDAVIT OF BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQ. REGARDING NEED FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 1. I, Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. Along with co-counsel, I represent Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 (as referred to as "the victims") in the above-listed action to enforce their rights under the Crime Victims Rights Act (CVRA). I also represented them (and several other victims) in civil suits against Jeffrey Epstein for sexually abusing them. I am also familiar with the criminal justice system, having served as state prosecutor in the Broward County State Attorney's Office. 2. This affidavit covers factual issues regarding the Government's assertions of privilege to more tha

64p
Court UnsealedDepositionJul 31, 2020

Virginia Giuffre Deposition May 2016

Case Document 1090-32 Filed 07/30/20 Page 1 of 89 EXHIBIT Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1090-32 Filed 07/30/20 Page 2 of 89 GIUFFRE VS. MAXWELL Deposition VIRGINIA GIUFFRE 05/03/2016 _______________________________________________________________________ Agren Blando Court Reporting & Video, Inc. 216 16th Street, Suite 600 Denver Colorado, 80202 303-296-0017 Agren Blando Court Reporting & Video, Inc. Page 3 of 89 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1090-32 Filed 07/30/20 Page 1 IN THE UNI

89p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Virginia Roberts 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

87p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-CI V-Marra/Matthewman JANE DOE # I and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS' FIRST REOUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO THE GOVERNMENT The United States (hereinafter the "government") hereby responds to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's First Request for Admissions to the Government Regarding Questions Relevant to Their Pending Action Concerning the Crime Victims Rights Act (hereinafter the "Request for Admissions"), and states as follows:' I. The government admits that the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO") conducted an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") and developed evidence and information in contemplation of a potential federal prosecution against Epstein for many federal sex offenses. Except as otherwise admitted above, the government denies Request No. I. The government's res

65p
Court UnsealedFeb 3, 2024

Epstein Drop Five

Exhibit G Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1335-3 Filed 01/09/24 Page 1 of 223 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CONFIDENTIAL 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 15-000072 BRADLEY J. EDWARDS and PAUL G. CASSELL, Plaintiffs, -vs- CONFIDENTIAL ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, Defendant. ____________________________________/ VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF VIRGINIA ROBERTS GIUFFRE Saturday, January 16, 2016 9:07 a.m. - 2:48 p.

223p

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.