Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-36272House OversightOther

Motion to Join Jane Doe Plaintiffs Cites Jeffrey Epstein Trafficking of Minor to Alan Dershowitz and Prince Andrew

The passage reveals a filing that directly links a high‑profile attorney (Alan Dershowitz) and a senior royal (Prince Andrew) to alleged sexual trafficking by Jeffrey Epstein, and it shows the governm Jane Doe No. 3 (Giuffre) alleges Epstein trafficked her as a minor to Dershowitz and Prince Andrew. The motion to join was filed on Dec 30 2014 and references specific confidential documents (DE 279,

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #015628
Pages
1
Persons
4
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage reveals a filing that directly links a high‑profile attorney (Alan Dershowitz) and a senior royal (Prince Andrew) to alleged sexual trafficking by Jeffrey Epstein, and it shows the governm Jane Doe No. 3 (Giuffre) alleges Epstein trafficked her as a minor to Dershowitz and Prince Andrew. The motion to join was filed on Dec 30 2014 and references specific confidential documents (DE 279,

Tags

sexual-traffickingjeffrey-epsteinprince-andrewcourt-filingforeign-influencevictim-testimonyalan-dershowitzlegal-exposureconfidential-recordsmoderate-importancehouse-oversightvictim-rightssexual-misconduct

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.
Edwards, Bradley vs. Dershowitz Case No.: CACE 15-000072 Edwards and Cassells Response to Dershowitz's Motion to Determine Confidentiality of Court Records Page 8 of 20 Because the Government now contested the joinder motion, Edwards and Cassell prepared a more detailed pleading explaining the justification for granting the motion. One week after receiving the Government’s objection, on December 30, 2014, Ms. Giuffre (i.e., Jane Doe No. 3) and Jane Doe No. 4 filed a motion (and later a corrected motion) seeking to join the case. DE 279 and DE 280. (Note: DE 280 is the first of the three documents Dershowitz seeks to have declared “confidential” in this case.) Uncertain as to the basis for the Government’s objection, the motion briefly proffered the circumstances that would qualify the two women as “victims” eligible to assert rights under the CVRA. See 18 U.S.C. 3771(e) (defining “crime victim” protected under the Act). With regard to Ms. Giuffre, the motion indicated that when she was a minor, Jeffrey Epstein had trafficked her to Dershowitz and Prince Andrew (among others) for sexual purposes. Jane Doe No. 3 stated that she was prepared to prove her proffer. See DE 280 at 3 (“If allowed to join this action, Jane Doe No. 3 would prove the following . .. . “). The motion also provided specific reasons why Jane Doe No. 3’s participation was relevant to the case, including the pending discovery issues regarding Dershowitz and Prince Andrew. DE 280 at 9-10 (explaining several reasons participation of new victims was relevant to existing issues). After the motion was filed, various news organizations published articles about it. Dershowitz also made numerous media statements about the filing, including calling Jane Doe No. 3 “a serial liar” who “has lied through her teeth about many world leaders.” —_ http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/06/us/dershowitz-sex-allegation/, Dershowitz also repeatedly called Edwards and Cassell “two sleazy, unprofessional, disbarable lawyers.” Jd On

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

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

URLhttp://www.cnn.com/2015/01/06/us/dershowitz-sex-allegation

Related Documents (6)

House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

NY Post seeks to unseal sealed appellate briefs in Jeffrey Epstein appeal, exposing DA and prosecutor conduct

The filing reveals a concrete dispute over sealed court documents that could shed light on why the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and Florida prosecutors allegedly gave Jeffrey Epstein preferent NY Post filed a motion (Dec 21, 2018) to unseal appellate briefs in Epstein’s SORA appeal, requestin Manhattan DA’s office (Danny Frost, Karen Friedman‑Agnifilo) initially opposed unsealing, citing C

55p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01481978

106p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 317-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/12/2015 Page 1 of 8

8p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 291 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/21/2015 Page 1 of 40

40p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 291 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/21/2015 Page 1 of 40

40p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

WVVW.PATHTOJUSTICECOM

WVVW.PATHTOJUSTICECOM Oro Tam Class Attie., Personal Injury Wrongful Death Commercial Liogation Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos Et Lehrman, P.L. January 29, 2015 Wilfredo A. Ferrer United States Attorney Southern District of Florida 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, FL 33132 RE: Jane Does I and 2 v. United States Case No. 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Dear Mr. Ferrer: As you know, we have corresponded with you in the past on the Crime Victims' Rights Act case captioned above. And you met with Jane Doe No. 1 several years ago, promising (as we understood it) to do what could be done to help protect crime victims' rights in this case. It is in that spirit that we are writing to request your assistance on three motions that we are planning to make shortly in this case. We hope that you will be able to agree to all three requests. We will be filing these motions on Friday, February 6, 2015. Accordingly, the favor of a reply by Wednesday, February 4, 2015, is requested. I. Mot

80p

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.