On March 19, 2026, Dave Min participated in a podcast discussion addressing legal matters connected to Jeffrey Epstein. During the segment, Min stated that attorney Bradley Edwards had committed perjury "over and over and over" during his testimony. This claim was presented as part of a broader conversation about the handling of Epstein-related legal proceedings.
The comments were shared through a Forbes Breaking News social media post, which linked to an audio recording of the podcast episode. The post included hashtags related to human trafficking and cults but did not provide additional context or supporting evidence regarding the allegations. No formal legal findings or court rulings were cited in connection with the statement.
Bradley Edwards has not publicly responded to the accusation in the available materials. The podcast appearance was promoted through Cult Podcasts' official channels, which described the discussion as part of an ongoing examination of high-profile cases. The recording remains accessible via YouTube and external links referenced in the social media post.
The statement by Min falls within a category of public commentary on legal cases involving Epstein, a figure whose legal matters have been the subject of extensive public and judicial scrutiny. However, no new evidence or official findings were introduced in the podcast segment referenced.
The use of terms such as "perjuring himself" reflects Min’s characterization of Edwards’ testimony, but such characterizations do not constitute legal determinations. The podcast discussion appears to be part of a broader discourse on accountability and transparency in high-profile legal matters.
No official investigations, court rulings, or disciplinary actions have been reported in connection with the claims made during the podcast. The available materials consist solely of public statements and promotional content related to the episode.
The situation underscores the importance of distinguishing between personal assertions made in informal settings and formal legal processes. As of the available information, no authoritative body has validated or refuted the accusation in question. The podcast remains accessible for public review, though it does not represent an official legal proceeding.
