EFTA00014067

Filing # 31897743 E-Filed 09/10/2015 12:44:35 PM

From: Brad Edwards

From: Brad Edwards To: Cc: Paul Cassell Subject: Re: Rescheduling Settlement Conference - bad date Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 20:39:34 +0000 Importance: Normal Inline-Images: image001.png; image002.png I will forward everything to Paul. is calling me Tuesday. I will use that time to relay everything to her and see where we are then. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 25, 2016, at 4:23 PM, wrote: Hi Paul — Thank you for your email. July 5th is bad for us, too, but I saw Judge Brannon to sign some search warrants yesterday and, although we didn't talk about this case, he mentioned how full his schedule was. I don't know that he is going to be inclined to move it, especially in light of Jane Doe #1's status. I am wondering if you think it is possible for us to finalize things without going back to court? Brad now has our complete packet and I think if we can get things resolved over the next week, then we can take the settlement conference off the calendar and move on to asking Judg

Allegations linking Alan Dershowitz, [REDACTED - Survivor], and Jeffrey Epstein to alleged extortion and sexual abuse claims in a court filing

Allegations linking Alan Dershowitz, [REDACTED - Survivor], and Jeffrey Epstein to alleged extortion and sexual abuse claims in a court filing The passage references high‑profile individuals (Alan Dershowitz, Jeffrey Epstein, a former federal judge) and claims of extortion, false accusations, and sexual abuse involving underage girls. While the text is fragmented and lacks concrete dates or transaction details, it suggests possible legal strategies and coordinated allegations that could merit further document review and witness interviews. The novelty is moderate because similar accusations have been reported, but the specific mention of a court filing and a “motion” provides a concrete lead for investigators. Key insights: Dershowitz alleges a plot to extort him involving false sexual abuse claims.; [REDACTED - Survivor]' allegations are tied to a declaration filed on Jan 15, 2015 against the government.; Reference to attempts to overturn Epstein’s non‑prosecution agreement.

Subjec

Fr • < > Subjec :Deliberative t Process ec aratton rom am Justice - equest or wo ee xtension Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:59:47 +0000 Importance: Normal We have no objection, provided we get the following accommodation, which you already anticipated. We would request that your motion for extension of time give us an extension on our reply document, such that our reply would be due 10 days after the main Justice Department declaration that will be coming in two weeks. If you would include such language as well in any proposed order, saving us (and the court) drafting time, that would be very much appreciated. Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G Cassell 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, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message

STATEMENT BY ALAN DERSHOWITZ

Legal analysis of CVRA pre‑charging rights and OLC position

The passage is a doctrinal discussion of how the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) may apply before formal charges are filed. It cites case law and a Senate comment but provides no concrete allegations Discusses whether filing a police complaint triggers Sixth Amendment prosecution. Analyzes OLC’s interpretation of CVRA venue provision and its division of criminal cases into invest Cites Senator Jo