Epstein Files Unsealed: Paul Cassell's Deposition In Cassell/Edwards V. Dershowitz (Part 6) (3/9/26)
Mar 10, 2026
Sworn testimony about efforts to challenge Jeffrey Epstein’s 2008 non-prosecution deal. Discussion of why certain names were circled in an address book and how investigators would pursue those leads. Examination of the factual basis for alleging frequent visits to Palm Beach and the sources that informed those claims. Debate over professional ethics, privilege objections, and the boundaries of victim advocacy.
15:55
forum Ask episode
web_stories AI Snips
view_agenda Chapters
auto_awesome Transcript
info_circle Episode notes
insights INSIGHT
Circled Names Are Investigation Leads Not Convictions
Paul Cassell views circled names in the address book as leads for investigators rather than proven wrongdoing.
He points to Ghislaine Maxwell, identified traffickers, pilots, and many circled names as context linking them to Epstein investigations.
question_answer ANECDOTE
Alfredo Rodriguez's Insurance Copy Story
Cassell recounts his belief that the address book belonged to Alfredo Rodriguez as an 'insurance policy' against Epstein harming him.
He says Rodriguez maintained a copy because he feared Epstein might try to have him killed, making the book valuable evidence.
insights INSIGHT
Frequent Visits Plus Circumstance Warrant Follow Ups
Cassell treats a frequent visitor's circled name plus other circumstantial ties as warranting follow-up, not as a direct accusation.
He uses Donald Trump as an example: friend, frequent visitor, circled in the book — all reasons to investigate further.
Get the Snipd Podcast app to discover more snips from this episode
In the Broward County defamation litigation CACE 15-000072, the deposition at issue is sworn testimony from Paul Cassell, one of the attorneys representing Epstein survivors and a former federal judge. Cassell’s deposition focuses on his role in challenging the 2008 federal Non-Prosecution Agreement granted to Jeffrey Epstein, and on statements he made publicly about Alan Dershowitz that later became the basis for Dershowitz’s defamation claims. Cassell explains the factual foundation for his remarks, emphasizing that they were rooted in court filings, sworn victim testimony, investigative reporting, and contemporaneous evidence. He details how survivors’ allegations against Dershowitz emerged, how they were evaluated by legal teams, and why he believed it was appropriate and accurate to reference them in public advocacy surrounding Epstein’s secret plea deal. Cassell consistently frames his conduct as part of his duty to represent victims and expose prosecutorial misconduct, not as a personal attack.
The deposition also addresses Dershowitz’s accusation that Cassell acted recklessly or with malice, which Cassell firmly rejects. He testifies that he never fabricated claims, never coached witnesses to lie, and never acted outside ethical or professional boundaries. Cassell underscores that his statements reflected allegations already made under oath by victims and contained in legal records, and that suppressing discussion of those allegations would further harm survivors. Throughout the testimony, Cassell situates the dispute within the larger Epstein cover-up, arguing that the real issue is not reputational discomfort among the powerful but the systemic failure to protect exploited minors. The deposition ultimately functions as a defense of victim-centered advocacy and transparency, directly countering Dershowitz’s narrative that survivor allegations were invented, coerced, or irresponsibly amplified.
The Vault: The Epstein Files