I feel like this may be a job for guillotine

this is what is called a sworn affidavit.

that is what it comes from

it is a type of testimonial evidence, like a deposition or statements in court.

Just going by the date, 2016, it looks like it might be from one of the MANY defamation lawsuits that flew between various involved people. Buckle up because it's a bumpy ride.

In 2008, the attorney representing Virginia Roberts Giuffre and other Epstein victims, Brad Edwards, sued over Jeffrey Epstein's sweetheart deal to avoid prison. The law involved is called the Crime Victims Rights Act, or CVRA, and that's what you'll see this original lawsuit called, or by its actual name, Jane Doe v. USA 2008. This lawsuit actually started as soon as the victims realized they'd been formally shafted by the state of Florida, and involved Edwards and the other attorneys involved obtaining many supporting witness depositions, some of which were filed at the time, some of which were held back. I don't know why some were not filed until later, but many were used in more than one lawsuit over the years.

Keep in mind that when I say "filed" I am using the US legal definition of the word, and by that I mean a specific document is formally attached to an existing lawsuit and becomes public record. You can have a thousand depositions, but until/unless they are filed, like a witness deposition as an exhibit, it's not public record and no one knows about it except the attorneys who obtained it.

But back to yours. My best guess is that the one you're looking at, the one from 2016, is probably from the blizzard of lawsuits that started flying when a deposition from the 2008 CVRA case naming Alan Dershowitz as one of Giuffre's abusers was filed in 2014. Giuffre's witness depositions -- which are really what blew this whole thing open -- were naming names, and his is among them. Giuffre also went after the nonce formerly known as Prince Andrew, then Ghislane Maxwell called her a liar so she sued Ghislane Maxwell for defamation, and of course Alan Dershowitz sued for defamation because she named him directly.

But that's not all. When Dershowitz started suing, he didn't just go after Giuffre, he went after her attorneys as well. And then the attorneys of the attorneys were suing.

So what you're looking at is a massive clusterfuck of lawsuits created by a master of legal clusterfuckery, Alan Dershowitz, and the various defenses and responses to that. It's literally a circle of claymore mines all shooting lawsuits. Bleak House, but pedos instead of probate: Alan Dershowitz v. the entire group of known Epstein victims AND their attorneys.

And every single one of these suits contain filed supporting witness depositions such as the one you're reading: not just depositions to elicit testimony and find truth, but depositions as weaponry and harassment. Dershowitz in particular went after every single witness who had ever testified in any way in support of Virginia Giuffre, not to find fact, but to be able to legally force them to sit in a room and be battered with nasty questioning for hours on end so they'd be very discouraged from ever standing as a witness ever again.

And this all went on for YEARS. The CVRA case alone didn't get resolved until I think 2021, and that started in 2008.

But funny enough, the particular defamation lawsuit between Dershowitz and Giuffre and/or her attorneys that is the root of most of what you are seeing ended with a draw, because they each brought a weapon to the table the other couldn't counter: Dershowitz brought unlimited legal actions until the end of time, and Giuffre brought witness statements like the one you're reading, with as many more to come as she wanted to round up. In the end, they both stood down. The others kept going, and some still are.

That's the background, but the rest is up to you. You can use the case number on the DoJ website to identify which particular case this is from and try to sort it out from there.

You do realize that the “Doe” in the name is to protect the identity of the victim or witness right?

The source would be anonymous, per the FBI

The good comments are already taken, so I'm just gonna ask what is the point of a signature for a pseudonym? (Signatures in an of themselves are a bit shit as security of any sort.)

Why? Do you want to kill this witness and their family?