Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00207929DOJ Data Set 9Other

From: Paul Cassell <[email protected]>

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00207929
Pages
5
Persons
6
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

From: Paul Cassell <[email protected]> To: Cc: Brad Edwards <[email protected]> Subject: RE: extra pages Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:55:18 +0000 Importance: Normal Heys, and Ed, Sorry I had to leave the call early Friday. Meant to check with you on this then. I am working with Brad to finalize our pleadings to be filed on Monday in response to the motion to dismiss. We are filing an unsealed pleading (that does not discuss grand jury material) as well as a sealed pleading (that discusses only the grand jury material and related issues). The unseal pleading is 24 pages long and the sealed pleading is 7 pages long. We also have a response to the motion to stay which is well under the 20 page limit. Any objection to a motion for the extra pages (4 + 7, although I'm not sure whether we count the 7) to respond to your motion to dismiss? Thanks for your help on getting back to us. PC Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law Quinney Co

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.
From: Paul Cassell <[email protected]> To: Cc: Brad Edwards <[email protected]> Subject: RE: extra pages Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:55:18 +0000 Importance: Normal Heys, and Ed, Sorry I had to leave the call early Friday. Meant to check with you on this then. I am working with Brad to finalize our pleadings to be filed on Monday in response to the motion to dismiss. We are filing an unsealed pleading (that does not discuss grand jury material) as well as a sealed pleading (that discusses only the grand jury material and related issues). The unseal pleading is 24 pages long and the sealed pleading is 7 pages long. We also have a response to the motion to stay which is well under the 20 page limit. Any objection to a motion for the extra pages (4 + 7, although I'm not sure whether we count the 7) to respond to your motion to dismiss? Thanks for your help on getting back to us. PC Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 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. From- AA. ilmetnr NA PI CI filevIrr I eerlinAni arnd Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 3:23 PM To: Paul Cassel /1 TO a CI CV. n TO A CT Cot Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: Conference call 11:15 AM Florida time - Friday Paul, We will take care of the arrangements for tomorrow at 11:15 a.m. Thanks. Dexter From: Paul enc.p11 mailto:cassella©law.utah.edu] Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 4:59 PM To: Cc: Brad Edwards; I•sevastalaSolgoehsia). Subject: RE: Conference call 11:15 AM Florida time - Friday Hi all, Does 11:15 AM Florida time on Friday work? ) EFTA00207929 If so, please call my cell phone (801) 2014271 as well as Brad — Ed/Dexter can y'all initiate the conference call or set up a call in number? Looking forward to chatting. PC Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law 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. Sent: To: S Cc: B Subje Hi everyone — Sony, I am having a very busy duty week. Tomorrow I have court at 9:00 probably until 11:00 and then again from 3:00 until 5:00. I have a debriefing at 1:00, but I should be able to step out after 1:30. So, 11:15 or 1:30 are best for me, but your schedules take priority. From CA. lr A rt Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 3:52 PM To: Paul Cassell Cc: Brad Edwards; Subject: RE: Discovery Issues in Epstein - conference call at 5 PM today? Unfortunately, that doesn't work for us today. Can we set up a time for tomorrow? Counselor to the United States Attorney United States Attorney's Office 99 N.E. 4th Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33132 Telephone: 305.961.9057 EFTA00207930 ----Original Message-- From: Paul Cassell [mailto:cassella©law.utah.edu]cznailtoimailto:[email protected]]> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 2:22 PM To: Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: Discovery Issues in Epstein - conference call at 5 PM today? Hi wand Co., Thanks for the call. Sony I was on the other line. Can we set up a time certain? That way Brad can participate. He is in a depo until 4:30, but should be free at 5 PM your time today (Thursday). Does that work? Looking forward to chatting. PC Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 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. EFTA00207931 From: Paul Cassell Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 11:25 AM To: Cc: 'Brad Edwards' Subject: RE: Discovery Issues in Epstein Dear Mr. eenehre We will shortly be filing a motion to compel Government responses to our discovery requests — discovery which, as you know, Judge Marra has already ordered. We realize, of course, that the Government has filed a motion to dismiss/stay. But if the Government's position is rejected on those motions, then the next issue is what discovery can we expect to receive from the Government. If the motions are denied, will the Government voluntarily produce anything to us? Will the government at least agree to produce the following: (1) The Government's initial disclosures pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26; (2) Answers to all of the victims' requests for admission; (3) All documents, correspondence, and other information that the Government distributed to persons or entities outside of the federal Government or received from persons or entities outside of the federal government; and (4) All documents, correspondence, and other information covered by the victims' discovery request that is not subject to a claim of privilege. And, for all other information withheld, will the Government agree to produce a document•by-document privilege log, as required by the local rules? Thanks for your help on these questions and Brad and I have. Sincerely, Paul Cassell Co•Counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe rt2 Paul G. Cassell EFTA00207932 Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 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. EFTA00207933

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Page 1

Page 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 2 3 JANE DOE, ) Case No. ) 08-80736-CIV-MARRA 4 Petitioner, ) 6 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,) ) 7 Respondent. ) West Palm Beach, Florida ) August 14, 2008 8 ) 9 10 TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE KENNETH A. MARRA 12 U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 11 13 14 Appearances: 15 FOR THE PETITIONER Bradley J. Edwards, ESQ., and Paul G. Cassell, ESQ. 16 17 FOR THE RESPONDENT AUSA, and 18 19 Reporter Stephen W. Franklin, RMR, CRR, CPE 20 MIIIIIMIll 21 22 23 24 25 Official Court Reporter AUSA EFTA00212781 Page 2 1 (Call to the order of the Court.) 2 THE COURT: Good afternoon. 3 VOICES: Good afternoon, Your Honor. 4 THE COURT: All right. This is the case of In Re: 5 Jane Does 1 and 2, case number 08-80736-C/V-MARRA. 6 May I have counsel state appearances, please, and 7 if you can please try and speak up so we can hear you. 8 MR. EDWARDS: Okay. Brad Edwards, on be

27p
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
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
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 9OtherUnknown

EFTA00206003

EFTA00206003 EFTA00206004 EFTA00206005 EFTA00206006 EFTA00206007 EFTA00206008 EFTA00206009 EFTA00206010 EFTA00206011 EFTA00206012 EFTA00206013 EFTA00206014 EFTA00206015 EFTA00206016 EFTA00206017 EFTA00206018 EFTA00206019 EFTA00206020 EFTA00206021 EFTA00206022 EFTA00206023 EFTA00206024 EFTA00206025 EFTA00206026 EFTA00206027 EFTA00206028 EFTA00206029 EFTA00206030 EFTA00206031 EFTA00206032 EFTA00206033 EFTA00206034 EFTA00206035 EFTA00206036 EFTA00206037 EFTA00206038 EFTA00206039 EFTA00206040 EFTA00206041 EFTA00206042 EFTA00206043 EFTA00206044 EFTA00206045 EFTA00206046 EFTA00206047 EFTA00206048 EFTA00206049 EFTA00206050 EFTA00206051 From: Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 12:27 PM To: Brad Edwards Subject: FYI Attachments: 111711Epstein NY Appellate Division Decision.pdf EFTA00206052 Hi Brad — The DA in New York sent this to me. I thought you might be interested. Also mentioned that if you and Paul want to send a proposed redacted

163p

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.