Filing #

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

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.

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.

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

DS9 Document EFTA01100999

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 291-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/21/2015 Page 1 of

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 291-15 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/21/2015 Page 1 of 40 EXHIBIT 16 EFTA00081180 Case 9:08-cv-807m091349pept Z91-15 _EriterM ocp WERocisstifolf/E15 Page 2 of roio-< uoc 16q0,3 e 0 EXHIBIT C Epstein vs. Edwards Undisputed Statement of Facts EFTA00081181 Case 9:08-cv-807ailaVs kigsyffigt 28415-c1p6Arger phri N 7NRocieatgfe)10/§815 Page 3 of IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Case No.: 50 2009 CA 040800XXXKMBAG JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Plaintiff, VS. SCOTT ROTHSTEIN, individually, and BRADLEY I EDWARDS, individually, Defendants, STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS Defendant Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., offers the following specific facts as the undisputed material facts in this case. Each of the following facts is numbered separately and individually to facilitate Epstein's required compliance with Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(c) ("The adverse party shall identify . . . any summary judgment evidence on wh