Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-37032House OversightOther

Witness claims flight logs exonerate him from alleged Jeffrey Epstein flights despite not reviewing all logs

The passage provides a specific allegation that a high‑profile individual (implied to be a lawyer or public figure) was never on Jeffrey Epstein's plane, citing flight logs he claims to have reviewed. Witness repeatedly asserts flight logs prove his innocence regarding alleged sex with Virginia Rober Admits he only reviewed some, not all, of the flight logs produced in discovery. Claims he knew wi

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #010799
Pages
2
Persons
4
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage provides a specific allegation that a high‑profile individual (implied to be a lawyer or public figure) was never on Jeffrey Epstein's plane, citing flight logs he claims to have reviewed. Witness repeatedly asserts flight logs prove his innocence regarding alleged sex with Virginia Rober Admits he only reviewed some, not all, of the flight logs produced in discovery. Claims he knew wi

Tags

jeffrey-epsteinflight-logsdocumentary-evidenceforeign-influencediscovery-documentslegal-exposurehouse-oversightsexual-abuse-allegationslegal-testimonysexual-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.
wow ony nm ® WN NNN NNN BH BR eB bb be bt fe “ne WN OL OI KRM FWN EO 241 (Discussion off the record.) JHE WITNESS: What's Number 6 then? I'm confused, there were two. BY MR. SCAROLA: Q. Have you ever seen Exhibit Number 6 before? A. Exhibit Number 6. I don't believe so. It doesn't look familiar to me. Q. No? A. It does not look familiar to me. Q. Did you bother at any time to review discovery that was produced by Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell responding to requests for information that supported the allegations of [REDACTED]? A. I'm not clear what you're asking. Q. Iwant te know — A. In which case? In which case are we talking? Q. This case. This case. A. Right. Q. Did you ever bother to review the discovery produced in this case responding to requests for all of the information that supported their belief in the truthfulness of Virginia Roberts' allegations against you? wo On nM ® WN NNNNNN PRP PP PP ee ee Ue WN HOUMA AMH &® WN OO 243 exonerated by any flight logs that were innocent -- that were complete and accurate, of course. Q. So you made the public statements repeatedly that the flight logs would exonerate you without having examined the flight logs to see whether they were accurate or not; is that correct? A. Weill, I knew -- I knew that -- Q. Did you say those things without having examined the flight logs? A. I said those things having looked at some of the flight logs at some point in time. But! knew for sure that the flight logs would exonerate me because I knew I was never on Jeffrey Epstein's plane with [REDACTED] or any other young underage girls. So, I knew that to an absolute certainty. And I was prepared to say it. I'm prepared to say it again under oath here. And if your clients had simply called me and told me they were planning to do this, we wouldn't be here today because I could have shown them in one day that it was impossible for me to have had sex with their client on the island, in the ranch, on the airplanes, in Palni Beach. And they would have, if they were decent and ethical lawyers, not filed that. wo on nM ® WN NNNNN NEP RPP PPB eB BP PR ue WNP OW DAYH UM BWNRO A. I don't know if T reviewed everything. But I certainly, in preparation for this deposition, reviewed some of the documents that were produced in discovery. But I can't say I reviewed them all. Q. Well, having placed such substantial emphasis during the course of your public appearances on the flight logs exonerating you, it would certainly seem logical that one of the things that you would want te review would be all of the available -- all of the available flight logs, right? A. No. MR. SCOTT: Objection, argumentative. A. No. BY MR. SCAROLA: Q. No? A. No. Look, I knew I was never on a plane with any underage females under any circumstances. I knew that. I knew that as certainly as I'm sitting here today. So, | knew absolutely that if the manifests and the flight logs were accurate, they would, of course, exonerate me because ] am totally, completely, unequivocally innocent of any of these charges. So of course | knew that I would be owv WwN HA WF WYN 244 And there are cases, legal ethics cases that say that lawyers are obliged to make that phone call. Lawyers are obliged to check if it's easy to check. Lawyers are obliged to, particularly when they're making extremely heinous charges against a fellow lawyer, do very, very, detailed investigations. And they didn't do that in this case. Q. I will represent to you that | have handed you all of the available flight logs produced in the discovery of this case. Could you show me, please, which of these flight logs exonerates you? A. The absence of evidence is evidence of absence. None of the flight logs have me on an airplane with [REDACTED]. None of the flight logs have me on an airplane during the relevant period of time when [REDACTED] claims that she had sex with me in the presence of another woman. So, the flight logs clearly exonerate me. There's absolutely no doubt about that, Q. Well, the flight logs, in fact, confirm that you were in the same places at the same time as [REDACTED], don't they? A. No, they do not. Q. Do you -- do you deny that they confirm 17 (Pages 241 to 244) www.phippsreporting.com (888) 811-3408

Technical Artifacts (2)

View in Artifacts Browser

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

Domainwww.phippsreporting.com
Phone(888) 811-3408

Related Documents (6)

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 OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Alfredo Rodriguez’s stolen “golden nugget” – a bound book linking Jeffrey Epstein to dozens of world leaders and billionaires

The passage describes a former Epstein employee, Alfredo Rodriguez, who allegedly stole a bound book containing the names, addresses and phone numbers of high‑profile individuals (e.g., Henry Kissinge Rodriguez claims the book lists names, addresses and phone numbers of dozens of influential individu He tried to sell the book to an undercover FBI agent for $50,000, indicating awareness of its valu

88p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

66p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Filing # 35429605 E-Filed 12/11/2015 10:08:04 AM

26p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 92 Filed 04/11/16 Page 1 of 22

22p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL) - RISHI SUNAK INVESTIGATION!! CASE REF: ZA52784 Re: Rishi Sunak Re: TRUMP SOS Re: Thank you

From: To: Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL) - RISHI SUNAK INVESTIGATION!! CASE REF: ZA52784 Re: Rishi Sunak Re: TRUMP SOS Re: Thank you to the Oz Police for confirming ! Emotional Blackmail Re: Sunday School? : Mike Baker and Emily Steel NY Timm Re: Gayle King Re: Naughty Brad and Daniel Bates Re: Theme Tune J1 Song For Funeral Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2025 17:49:22 +0000 Importance: Normal Inline-Images: IMG_6895.jpeg Hi President Trump, The Securities Exchange and the FCA Please can you investigate Rishi Sunak and his financials including California! Also please can you get everything and all correspondence from Rishi Sunaks office (ie George). The case number is ZA52784 as in the screen shot. Why would Rishi sunak want all his emails deleted if my server? Mmmmmm! Please can you investigate this for me President Trump because this could have all been resolved in 2022!! I've suffered enough!! EFTA00144040 07:49 sic I St S R <® Arrest Sent: 4 Argil 2022 10: To: SUNAK. Rishi S

42p

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.