# docs_fts_content

c1: EFTA00015298
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015298.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To: "Berman, Geoffrey (USANYS)"
Cc:
Subject: Re: Epstein
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2019 12:43:05 +0000
They've been calling BOP and no one answers. If anyone has a good contact there, just let us know. Thanks
I'm nearby the office if anyone needs me.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 10, 2019, at 8:38 AM, Berman, Geoffrey (USANYS)
wrote:
>
> BOP
V
>>
On Aug 10, 2019, at 8:31 AM,
wrote:
Can we confirm to the press? Or should we refer them to BOP?
>>
On Aug 10, 2019, at 8:24 AM, Berman, Geoffrey (USANYS)
wrote:
I just got a call from
that Epstein committed suicide this morning. He died on the way to the
hospital.
EFTA00015298


c1: EFTA00016619
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016619.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From
To
Cc
Subject: FW: US V Maxwell
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 20:02:32 +0000
Attachments: LBNAMAXT.PDF
From:
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 3:02 PM
To:
Subject: [EXTERNAL] US V Maxwell
EFTA00016619


c1: EFTA00016741
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016741.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
Subject: FW: photos
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 18:03:21 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: 2019-07-16,_JE_detention_submission.docx
You want to look first or want me to?
From:
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 2:02 PM
To:
(USANYS)
is
(USANYS)
Cc:
is
Subject: RE: photos
and
The letter is attached for your review- - the team has discussed. Thanks.
From:
)
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 1:46 PM
To:
)
Cc:
(USANYS)
is
is
(USANYS)
Subject: Re: photos
I can look now too
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 16, 2019, at 13:41,
)
wrote:
Just finished reviewing and discussing my thoughts with
now.
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 1:39 PM
To:
is
(USANYS)
Cc:
)
is
Subject: RE: photos
Are
and
able to look now? If it will be a while, we will review the interim version.
From:
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 1:32 PM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
(USANYS)
is
)
is
)
Subject: RE: photos
Just sent to
and
for a first look, and will circulate shortly after I input their comments. Thanks.
EFTA00016741

=== Page 2 ===
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 1:19 PM
To:
Cc:
(USANYS)
i
is
;
Subject: Re: photos
Okay. What is timing on a draft?
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 16, 2019, at 12:07 PM,
wrote:
FYI, I spoke with Judge
chambers and the clerk told me the Judge does not want to see photographs (he did
not explain), so we are not going to bring them to chambers.
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
New York, NY 10007
EFTA00016742


c1: EFTA00017101
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00017101.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
(NY) (FBI)"
)"
Cc:
)"
Subject: FW: Potential interview
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 23:16:45 +0000
Attachments: Statement_of_Jane _Do....df
Inline-Images: image005.png; image006.jpg
FYI. I told her yes.
From: Gloria Allred
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 7:00 PM
To:
is
)
Subject: Potential interview
I have another victim who is willing to speak to you while I'm in New York, as she is located in New York.
Attached here is her statement which I read in court.
Could you meet her on Thursday 9/12 at 5:00 pm at the Lotte, and then at 6 pm we can meet with
for as long as you need?
Please let me know so we can schedule.
Thank you.
Gloria Allred
Allred, Maroko & Goldberg
6300 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1500
Los Angeles, CA 90048
323-653-6530
www.amglaw.com
www.gloriaallred.com
Martindale-Hubbell"
PREEMINENT®
AV
Peer Rated for Highest Level
of Professional Excellence
2017
ALLRED. MAROKO & GOLDBERG
2018
Best Lawyers
This message is CONFIDENTIAL and may contain legally privileged information intended only for the addressee. If you are not the
addressee you may not use, forward, copy or disclose to anyone any information contained in this message. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS
COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY ALLRED, MAROKO & GOLDBERG IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONING THE SENDER NAMED
ABOVE AT 323-653-6530. Thank you.
EFTA00017101


c1: EFTA00015654
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015654.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To: Edward Friedland
Cc: Joseph Pecorino
>, Matthew Rogers
Subject: RE: Maxwell Link
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 18:04:41 +0000
Inline-Images: image001.jpg
Joe, Ed, here's what we're ready to post, unless you have any correction:
November 29, 2021
Victim Attendance at Trial in United States V. Ghislaine Maxwell
In orders dated October 14 and November 24, 2021, the S.D.N.Y. Court outlined procedures for
public access to the trial in this matter. (Trial began on November 29, 2021, with jury selection.)
Specifically, consistent with the District's COVID-19 protocols, the Court will ensure public access
(with COVID-19 distancing) to the trial in the courtroom itself and in several overflow rooms at the
courthouse with live feeds of the proceedings. Beyond the live feeds within the courthouse, the trial
will not be further broadcast; nor will there be any telephonic dial-in to the proceedings. Victim access
will be coordinated by the U.S. Attorney's Office Victim-Witness Coordinator,
), and Mr. Joseph Pecorino of the Court's District Executive
Office
(
). Victims who wish to attend the trial
may contact either one of those persons for further information.
COVID-19 Protocols. Per the S.D.N.Y. Response to COVID-19, anyone who appears at any
S.D.N.Y. courthouse must complete a questionnaire on the date of the proceeding prior to entering
the courthouse. All visitors must also have their temperature taken when they arrive at the
courthouse. Only persons who meet the entry requirements established by the questionnaire and
whose temperatures are below 100.4 degrees will be allowed to enter the courthouse. All visitors
must wear a mask that covers the person's nose and mouth. Bandannas, gaiters, and masks with
valves are not permitted. If a person does not have an approved mask, a screener will provide one.
Anyone who fails to comply with the COVID-19 protocols that have been adopted by the Court
will be required to leave the courthouse. There are no exceptions. For more information, please
see https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/covid-19-coronavirus.
From: Edward Friedland
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 12:01 PM
To:
is
Cc: Joseph Pecorino
>; Matthew Rogers
Subject: FW: Maxwell Link
This info on your web page is outdated and is causing the public to try and access the Maxwell matter by phone. Can you
pull down the access number info and update with the latest order which says in-person?
Edward A. Friedland, Esq.
District Court Executive
United States District Court
EFTA00015654

=== Page 2 ===
Southern District of New York
From: Joseph Pecorino
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 11:57 AM
To: Edward Friedland
Subject: Maxwell Link
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/united-states-v-ghislaine-maxwel
UNITED STATES DISTRIC COURT
Joseph Pecorino
WHI
Office of the District Executive
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
Email:
SOUTHERN DISTRICT of NEWYORK
Office:
PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING THIS E-MAIL *****
EFTA00015655


c1: EFTA00016320
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016320.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Instagram Business Record
Page 1
Service Instagram
Target 1322128817
Account ghislainemaxwell
Identifier
Account Type InstagramUser
Generated 2020-01-04 21:03:00 UTC
Date Range 2019-08-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-12-11 23:59:59 UTC
Ncmec Reports NCMEC Cybertips: NCMEC cybertip reports associated to the account of the sender.
Definition CyberTip ID: Unique identifier associated with the cybertip.
Time: Date and time the NCMEC cybertip was sent.
Responsible Id: Identification number of the sender's Facebook account associated with the NCMEC
cybertip report.
NCMEC No responsive records located
CyberTip
Numbers
Name Name: Name provided by the account holder.
Definition First: First name provided by the account holder.
Middle: Middle name provided by the account holder.
Last: Last name provided by the account holder.
Name
First Ghislaine Maxwell
Emails Registered Email Addresses: Displays a list of registered email addresses. To "register" an address, it
Definition requires confirmation by the account holder.
Registered
Email
Addresses
Vanity Vanity: Username associated with the account.
Definition
Vanity Name ghislainemaxwell
Registration Registration Date: Date and time of account creation.
Date Definition
Registration 2014-05-10 17:10:23 UTC
Date
Registration Ip IP address associated with account creation.
Definition
Registration Ip 69.203.141.229
EFTA00016320

=== Page 2 ===
Instagram Business Record
Page 2
Account End
Date Definition Account End Date: Displays the status of the account at the time the records were generated.
Account
Account Still true
Closure Date
Active
Phone Phone numbers: Phone number(s) provided by the account holder. "Verified" indicates the account
Numbers holder responded to a text sent to the listed phone number.
Definition
Phone No responsive records located
Numbers
Logins Logins: Information collected at the time the account was logged into.
Definition IP Address: IP address associated to the login.
Time: Date and time of the login.
Location: Location of the login.
Logins
IP Address 104.219.99.170
Time 2019-08-15 00:41:29 UTC
IP Address 104.219.99.170
Time 2019-08-14 21:31:18 UTC
EFTA00016321


c1: EFTA00016487
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016487.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
3500
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 21:09:10 +0000
Embedded: FW:_photo_project.msg
More TW 3500 for
attached, thanks!
EFTA00016487


c1: EFTA00014303
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014303.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: Call/Meeting on Epstein
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2018 02:48:11 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: unnamed
EFTA00014303


c1: EFTA00015685
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015685.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS) 6"
@usa.doj.gov>
To
(USANYS)"
Subject: RE: Epstein
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 17:28:45 +0000
Importance: Normal
Thanks!
From
(USANYS)
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 1:28 PM
To:
(USANYS) 6
@usa.doj.gov>
Subject: Epstein
Forgot to send this!
Public Affairs
United States Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney's Office I Southern District of New York
@usdoj.gov I Mobile:
Press Office
EFTA00015685


c1: EFTA00014418
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014418.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: Alexandra Conlon
To:
(USANYS)"
, Roberta Kaplan
Cc: "Kate L. Doniger"
)"
Subject: RE: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:53:41 +0000
Attachments: Touhy_Letter_and_Ex_A,_Doe_v_Indyke_et_al,_No._19-cv-8673_(S.D.N.Y.).pdf
SENT ON BEHALF OF ROBERTA KAPLAN
AUSA
Thank you for contacting us. Attached please find a Touhy letter and supporting exhibit requesting documents from the
Department of Justice in connection with our pending litigation against Jeffrey Epstein's estate.
We are happy to schedule a time to talk if it would be helpful to discuss our request.
Best Regards,
Robbie
Alexandra Conlon I Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 6:59 PM
To: Roberta Kaplan
Cc: Kate L. Doniger
>; Alex Conlon
Subject: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Ms. Kaplan,
Please find attached a letter regarding the request you discussed with AUSA
for certain information
relating to Jeffrey Epstein. As stated in the letter, please contact me once you have had a chance to review the letter if you
would like to discuss the issues therein further.
Thanks,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
This email and its attachments may contain information that is confidential and/or protected from disclosure by the attorney-client, work product or other
applicable legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient of the email, please be aware that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination,
EFTA00014418

=== Page 2 ===
distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the message from your computer system. Thank you.
EFTA00014419


c1: EFTA00015300
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015300.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: USMS Official Statement
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2019 19:16:26 +0000
USMS OFFICIAL STATEMENT:
The U.S. Marshals Service confirms the death of a federal prisoner, Jeffrey Edward Epstein, 66, on August 10,
2019. The USMS does not own or operate detention facilities but partners with state and local governments, the
Federal Bureau of Prisons and private detention facilities to house its prisoner population. Epstein was a USMS
inmate being held at BOP's Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York. The FBI is handling the
death investigation.
Sent from my iPhone
EFTA00015300


c1: EFTA00014540
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014540.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
Cc:
)"
)"
Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 02:25:20 +0000
Will do.
From:
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 22:24
To:
)
Cc:
is
Subject: Re: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York
Perfect - call my cell- -
- sent from my iPhone - please excuse brevity and errors.
On Jul 25, 2019, at 8:21 PM,
wrote:
Thanks very much. Would 10:00 a.m. tomorrow your time (noon our time) work? If so, we can call you then at
or if not, we could also do 2:00 p.m. your time.
thanks,
From:
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 22:13
To:
Cc:
is
Subject: Re: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York
Happy to chat tomorrow. Name your time that's convenient for you.
- sent from my iPhone - please excuse brevity and errors.
On Jul 25, 2019, at 8:07 PM,
)
wrote:
Thank you for sending us these materials, we appreciate being able to stay up to date, and we'll continue to keep an
eye on the docket for submissions that may be relevant for our investigation.
Separately, might you be available for a quick call sometime tomorrow (Friday) or next week? No rush or emergency,
but we wanted to talk with you about a question in connection with your expertise on the CVRA generally. At your
convenience.
thanks,
EFTA00014540

=== Page 2 ===
From:
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 13:01
To:
Cc:
is
Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York
Hi
I wanted to make you aware of a recent filing (on Tuesday) by Jane Doe 1 and 2 in the Florida CVRA case. See
attached. You may find interesting our argument at pp. 3-6, in which we explain why Judge Marra must craft remedies
in the case that relate solely to Florida crimes and Florida victims because the NPA only covers Florida.
We filed our reply brief on remedies on Tuesday - and that should have brought all briefing on remedies for the CVRA
violation to a close. But yesterday Epstein's lawyer (Marty Weinberg) filed a motion for a sur-reply. See attached. In
point (a) on page 2, he argues that he should have an opportunity to file a sur-reply discussing, among other things,
the scope of the NPA. On Monday, we will be filing an opposition to Weinberg extending the briefing further. It
appears that Judge Marra is poised to rule rapidly on the motion for a sur-reply, as he asked for us to respond quickly.
I wanted to make you aware of these developments. My clients were told back in 2013 that the NPA did not extend to
New York or other jurisdictions - and that is the point we are making to Judge Marra.
for Jane Doe 1 and 2
(phone)
(fax)
You can access my publications on
CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the
addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this
message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message.
is admitted to
the Utah State Bar, but not the bars of other states. Any views he expresses in this email are his own.
EFTA00014541


c1: EFTA00014591
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014591.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: Emails
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2020 21:29:56 +0000
Attachments: FBI_0000018415_native.pdf_FBI_0000018635_native.pdf_FBI_0000011921_native.pdf
FBI_0000014600_native.pdf
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
New York, NY 10007
EFTA00014591


c1: EFTA00015804
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015804.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To: BOBBI C STERNHEIM <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Cc: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>,
)"
(USANYS)"
>, , Jeff
Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>, "Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP
(ceverdell@cohengresser.com) <ceverdell@cohengresser.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential
materials, scenes
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2021 00:42:33 +0000
Attachments: 2021.04.09_Government_letter_to_GM_counsel_re_16_discs.pdf
Good evening,
Attached please find a letter regarding Florida Item 8, Subitem 8.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From: BOBBI c STERNHEIM <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Sent: Friday, April 9, 2021 1:00 PM
To:
)
Cc: Laura Menninger <lmenninger@hmflaw.com>;
)
>;
(USANYS)
>; Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP
(ceverdell@cohengresser.com) <ceverdell@cohengresser.com>
Subject: Re: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Thank you.
BOBBI C. STERNHEIM, ESQ.
Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim
33 West 19th Street - 4th Floor
New York, NY 10011
Main: 212-243-1100
Cell: 917-912-9698
Fax: 888-587-4737
bcsternheim@mac.com
EFTA00015804

=== Page 2 ===
This message and any attached documents contain information from the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim
that may be confidential and/or privileged.
If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this information.
If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this
message. Thank you.
On Apr 9, 2021, at 12:01 PM,
wrote:
All,
Today the Marshals and the FBI informed me that they are able to arrange for your client and the evidence to be at 500
Pearl in time for the review to start as early as 8am each morning of the review period. The review can still continue
until 4:30pm each day. In order to take advantage of the extra time, I would propose planning to begin each review day
at 8:30am. You would also be welcome to arrive as early at 8am, and if the Marshals and FBI are ready to begin before
8:30, then we can do so. I will plan to be at 500 Pearl by 8am each morning.
Also, the CSOs have asked for a list of everyone from the defense team who should be granted access into the proffer
area on the fifth floor of 500 Pearl for the review. Would you please send me a list of the names of everyone who you
expect to attend the review?
Thank you,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From:
Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 10:05 PM
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
)
is
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Laura,
Below please find responses to the issues you raised:
EFTA00015805

=== Page 3 ===
We are confirmed for the review at the Bronx warehouse on April 12, 2021 from 11am to 4:30pm.
During the April 12th review, your team can see the evidence for yourselves and let me know if you need any of
the items you are not permitted to photograph to be brought to 500 Pearl. Depending on the size of the item(s),
we may need to figure out whether they can be brought later in the week once you have already reviewed
several boxes, which would free up space in the FBI vehicle for the larger items. I'm confident we will be able to
reach a reasonable agreement about those items.
For the bulky photos, you will not be permitted to photograph any that feature nudity. As referenced above, once
your team has seen those photos for yourselves, you can let me know if you will need any to be brought to 500
Pearl.
As I mentioned previously and is indicated in the spreadsheet, we are preparing a letter to defense counsel
explaining why you will not be permitted to review those 16 discs. We expect to send you that letter tomorrow,
after which I will be happy to discuss the matter further.
The blue-ray discs referenced in the spreadsheet are what the FBI burned in order to provide the USAO SDNY
with a copy of electronic data to produce to you in discovery. The discs are not evidence themselves. The data is
the evidence, and it was produced to you already. You are correct, however, that the 4/24/07 file is a data file
that was copied from a VHS tape, which is currently located in the FBI's ELSUR office in Florida. We have asked
that the original tape be shipped to New York, and it should arrive on Tuesday, April 13th. We will make it
available for you to review once we have received it. We also plan to produce the digital file of that same
recording to you as part of our productions of non-testifying witness statements.
The shredded paper is currently being analyzed by the FBI lab. We have asked the case agent to inquire with the
lab regarding its anticipated timeline for analysis and will let you know when we expect it will be possible to have
the shredded paper returned to New York for you to review. It will not, however, be available next week.
The "Missing from Assigned Box" items are items 1B130 and 1B110. Those items were migrated within the FBI
evidence system from the Florida case to the New York case and incorporated into New York evidence item
numbers 1B127, 1B128, & 1B137. So these items will be available for your review under those New York
evidence numbers.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2021 4:23 PM
To:
)
is
)
V.
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
EFTA00015806

=== Page 4 ===
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
-
My apologies, I meant to include in my previous email that we could have the Bronx view on Monday, April 12. Thank
you for the logistics.
Regarding the spreadsheets you provided, I have several issues.
First, there are a couple of items that you have noted for the Bronx Warehouse but will in fact need to be brought to 500
Pearl for review because you labeled them as "Highly Confidential" and not "bulky." These appear to include:
NY Evidence List
Items 1B127-130 (4 boxes).
Item 1B13 (1 box)
Florida Evidence List
Item 1, Subitem 26 - one large framed photo from Master Bedroom.
Second, with regard to the "Bulky" photos (Florida Items 1, Subitems 8, 15a, 15b and 15c), are we permitted to
photograph those or not? If not, we will need them transported to 500 Pearl.
Third, Florida Item 8, Subitem 8, says it is Sixteen DVD-R Discs from PBSO but you do not indicate that we can review
those. Why? We need to address with the Court promptly any issues related to our request to view all evidence.
Fourth, Electronic surveillance - Your email yesterday stated that these were all "electronic files" with no corresponding
physical item. However, for several, the chart indicates "Blu-Ray Disks;" is there a reason we cannot inspect these?
Another Florida item is listed as "one original recording of an interview dated 4/24/07"; I am suspicious that "one
original recording of an interview" is not truly only an "electronic" file? I was practicing law in 2007 and do not recall
"electronic files" being the standard then. Can you please confirm? I know that Chris has written separately about the
many files for which the metadata has apparently been stripped, so we will have to address purely electronic
information at another date.
Shredded Paper - Yes, we need to review that as well.
"Missing from Assigned Box" items - can you please provide more of an explanation for all "missing items"?
I will let you know any other issues as I see them. However, now that we have made travel plans in reliance on your
agreement to produce all evidence items, I am hoping that you can promptly answer these questions so that we can
resolve any of them as needed this week.
Thank you,
-Laura
Laura A. Menninger I Partner
Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C.
150 E. 10th Avenue I Denver, CO 80203
+1 303 831 7364 (Office)
lmenninger@hmflaw.com
From:
)
Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2021 1:44 PM
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
i
EFTA00015807

=== Page 5 ===
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Hi Laura,
The Bronx warehouse is located at 2350 Lafayette Ave, Bronx, NY. There is plenty of street parking outside of the
building. Whatever day you wish to have the review conducted at the warehouse, an AUSA and an agent will meet the
attorney, investigator, and paralegal at the warehouse to escort them into the building to the evidence review room.
The AUSA will remain present at the warehouse to answer any questions that may arise.
The FBI has informed me that they can make the evidence available for review at the warehouse any day next week or
the week of April 19th. Please just let me know what day you prefer, and we will coordinate with the FBI to arrange for
the review.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2021 3:30 PM
To:
-
is
)
>;
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Thank you for the updated spreadsheets and the information regarding the timing of the review at 500 Pearl.
I believe we will be able to have an attorney, investigator and paralegal present at the Bronx warehouse to take photos
of the "excluded from transportation" items. Please let us know the particulars for that visit when you have a moment.
Thank you,
Laura
Laura A. Menninger | Partner
Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C.
150 E. 10th Avenue I Denver, CO 80203
+1 303 831 7364 (Office)
Imenninger@hmflaw.com
From:
Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2021 10:06 AM
EFTA00015808

=== Page 6 ===
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
i
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Good morning,
Attached please find the revised spreadsheets, which reflect designations under the Protective Order for the three mini-
VHS tapes that I referenced below.
I learned this morning that the Marshals intend to bring Ms. Maxwell back to the MDC each review day at 4:30pm. So
we can plan for the review to take place at 500 Pearl Street from 9:30am to 4:30pm each day beginning on April 13th.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From:
Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2021 12:09 AM
To: 'Laura Menninger' <lmenninger@hmflaw.com>;
)
is
(USANYS)
Cc: 'Jeff Pagliuca' <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; 'Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Good evening,
Today, the Marshals confirmed that they will produce Ms. Maxwell to 500 Pearl Street on April 13, 2021 and every day
thereafter until the evidence review is complete. My understanding is that Ms. Maxwell should arrive to 500 Pearl
Street at approximately 9:30am each morning. So we are confirmed for evidence review in the proffer rooms on the 5th
floor of the 500 Pearl Street courthouse beginning at 9:30am on April 13th. I will plan to be present and to continue
assisting with logistics. If any questions or concerns arise, please feel free to call my cellphone at
To assist in preparing for this review, attached please find annotated versions of the three evidence spreadsheets I
previously emailed to you: (1) a spreadsheet of New York evidence; (2) a spreadsheet of Florida evidence; and (3) a
more detailed spreadsheet of the sub-items contained in the Florida evidence spreadsheet. A couple things to note:
These spreadsheets now indicate the Protective Order designation, if any, for each item to be reviewed. As you
will see, there are three mini-VHS tapes that I need to double check before assigning a final designation. I expect
to be able to access a mini-VHS cassette player later this week, at which point I will be able to provide an updated
spreadsheet with a confirmed designation for those three items. Additionally, please note that there is one item
about which we plan to provide you with a letter later this week.
These spreadsheets also indicate where each item will be made available for the defense to review. As you will
see, we have now learned that one item (consisting of shredded paper) is currently at FBI headquarters and will
EFTA00015809

=== Page 7 ===
not be available for review next week. Please let me know if you believe you need to review that item, and I will
inquire as to whether and how it can be relocated to New York. Additionally, all 1D items consist of electronic
data (as opposed to 1B items, which are physical items). As is noted in the spreadsheets, the electronic data that
constitute the 1D items in this case have either already been produced to you in discovery (e.g., pen register data,
GPS data, and aerial footage), or are digital recordings of interviews that will be produced as non-testifying
witness statements. Because these 1D items are data files stored in the FBI system, there is no corresponding
physical item to produce for you to review.
Please let me know when you would like to schedule a time for a smaller group from the defense team to review
evidence at the Bronx warehouse.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From:
Sent: Monday, April 5, 2021 10:48 PM
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
is
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Laura,
Thank you for your email and for your understanding as we work through the logistics of arranging this review. Your
modifications and clarifications are acceptable to us. Below I address each specifically:
The FBI can arrange for a lawyer, investigator, and paralegal to inspect and photograph the precluded items at the
Bronx warehouse either next week or the week after. Please let us know what day you would like to arrange for
that inspection, and I will coordinate with the FBI accordingly. I would suggest trying to schedule this visit early
next week if possible so that if there are items that you believe need to be produced to 500 Pearl Street, we will
have time to do so during a subsequent day of review at 500 Pearl if the FBI agrees to transport the item(s).
Tomorrow, I will send you evidence spreadsheets with annotations of which items the FBI will not be producing to
500 Pearl Street, and which items we are designating under the Protective Order. Please note that certain items
will be designated "Confidential," in which case they may be photographed, but the photographs should be
treated as Confidential under the Protective Order. Other items will be designated "Highly Confidential," in which
case they may not be photographed, absent specific authorization from an AUSA. I note the possibility of
authorization to photograph this latter category because some Highly Confidential evidence items include both
nude and non-nude portions, in which case we would permit photography of the non-nude portions.
In light of our decision to produce non-testifying witness statements beginning on April 12, 2021, we are no
longer segregating any electronic media that contain witness statements during this review. This is because all of
the witness statements on the electronic media in the FBI's possession are from witnesses whom the
Government does not expect to call at trial in this case. Please note that we intend to produce digital audio files
EFTA00015810

=== Page 8 ===
to you containing the contents of the electronic media with these non-testifying witness statements, but you are
of course welcome to review the original recordings themselves.
In terms of space, I have been informed that we will not be permitted to conduct this review in a courtroom and
will instead be required to do so in the proffer rooms. I have reserved the two largest proffer rooms available at
500 Pearl. We can use the largest proffer room for evidence review, and the slightly smaller proffer room as a
private meeting space for the defense team.
Confirmed, I will ask the FBI to bring all electronic highly confidential images to 500 Pearl Street, including the
2,100 that were not previously reviewed and the electronic images that were previously provided for review at
the MDC.
Confirmed, I will ask the FBI to bring the 7 hard-copy highly confidential materials to 500 Pearl Street.
As I mentioned earlier today in a separate email, the FBI and AUSAs are prepared to facilitate this review beginning April
13th and continuing every day thereafter until your review is complete. I have also formally requested that the Marshals
produce Ms. Maxwell to 500 Pearl Street on April 13th and every day thereafter until the review is complete. The
Marshals previously confirmed their willingness to produce Ms. Maxwell for such a review in general, but they have not
yet confirmed their ability to do so on any particular dates. I will let you know as soon as the Marshals inform me
whether they can accommodate these specific dates.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>
Sent: Friday, April 2, 2021 5:36 PM
To:
)
y.
)
y
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Thank you for your email. Your proposal is largely acceptable to us, with the following modifications and clarifications.
For the items that you propose below to exclude from the evidence transported to 500 Pearl Street (with the
exception of the cash held at 26 Federal Plaza), we will need to have access for a lawyer, investigator and
paralegal to inspect and photograph those items at the Bronx warehouse. This seems to include the bulky items,
electronic devices and "fragile" items.
Once they are photographed and shared with the team and our client, we can decide whether a separate
inspection by our client and/or any expert is necessary at a later time. To be clear, the government's
photos of these same items are insufficient.
If there are any items we are not permitted to photograph (and perhaps you will be able to tell us by April
5 which those are), we likely will need to have those transported because there is no way for our client to
inspect the evidence. We can wait to finalize this issue until you have finished deciding what items you
consider non-photographable, and if we can't agree, then discuss next steps.
EFTA00015811

=== Page 9 ===
Please let us know when these "non-transportable" items can be inspected and photographed at the Bronx
warehouse. It makes sense that it would be done soon so that we can raise any issues as necessary with
the Court.
For playing any of the electronic media, we will obtain the necessary equipment to play at 500 Pearl Street and
seek permission to bring those devices into the Courthouse. You can segregate out the section of recordings that
contain "witness statements" and advise us then which ones cannot be played, but we still need to inspect the
outside of those recordings.
As far as space, can you please advise whether the largest proffer room will be available for review of evidence?
It is my understanding that it can accommodate a large number of the team members at one time. If not, is a
locked courtroom available for us to review the evidence? The agents could bring out a limited number of boxes
at a time for inspection.
We understand that the evidence will not be taken outside of the monitoring of the agents or your staff and
appreciate that you will have a separate room for us to consult with our client privately (without the evidence).
We understand that all of the highly confidential materials, including not only the 2,100 images not previously
disclosed as well as the electronic images that were only shown to NY counsel and the client at the MDC, will be
available for review on a singular laptop at 500 Pearl Street.
We also understand the 7 hard-copy highly confidential materials will also be available for inspection at 500 Pearl
Street.
Please let me know if you have any questions or disagree with my understanding. If you agree, we can then proceed as
scheduled on April 12 and continue day to day until we are finished, with a break if necessary for the arraignment.
Laura A. Menninger I Partner
Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C.
150 E. 10th Avenue I Denver, CO 80203
+1 303 831 7364 (Office)
lmenninger@hmflaw.com
From:
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2021 4:38 PM
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
i
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com; 'BOBBI c STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Counsel,
Thank you for your email. Below please find our response. If this is acceptable to you, then we will proceed with
arranging the logistics of having your client produced to 500 Pearl the week of April 12th and the week April 19th. We
will also arrange for the FBI to transport evidence to 500 Pearl for review the week of April 12th.
Physical Evidence
It is not reasonable or feasible to insist that the FBI bring all physical evidence to 500 Pearl Street. That said, we
are certainly willing to work with you to ensure that your client can review any physical items that are material to
the preparation of her defense.
We would propose excluding the below items from production to 500 Pearl:
We appreciate your note that the massage tables are not needed, which will certainly help with the
logistics of transport.
We also appreciate your indication that the cash items from 26 Federal Plaza do not need to be produced.
Those are the only items not located in the Bronx warehouse.
EFTA00015812

=== Page 10 ===
The FBI has seized dozens of electronic devices, including desktop computers, servers, and laptops, from
Jeffrey Epstein's residences in 2019. Photographs of those devices were produced in our August 2020
productions as part of the search warrant photographs, and you have received copies of the data that was
seized from those devices pursuant to a warrant. The production of these devices would be very
cumbersome, and we do not see any value in looking at an electronic device that cannot be turned on.
The framed pictures are bulky and cumbersome to transport. These are also very delicate and are difficult
to transport. Photographs of those seized images were already provided to you as part of the photographs
from the searches of Epstein's residences.
Certain items seized from the New York residence are bulky, fragile, and/or difficult to transport. These
include plaster busts of female torsos and a stuffed dog. Photographs of these items were already
provided to you from the search of the New York residence.
The remaining physical items of evidence would fit into approximately 15 to 20 boxes. The FBI has indicated that
it would be feasible to transport those boxes to 500 Pearl Street.
Regarding your request for equipment that can play the recordings, we believe they would require a VCR, a
cassette player, a CD player, an adapter for a micro VHS tape, and a microcassette player. If you wish to play these
recordings at 500 Pearl, you will need to provide that equipment. We have asked the FBI whether any other
equipment would be necessary and will let you know if that is the case prior to the date of your review. It is our
understanding that any recordings that are not witness statements and that are not highly confidential have been
produced to you in discovery. We are not aware of any discoverable, non-highly confidential, recordings that
were not produced to you as part of the Government's discovery productions in the fall. To confirm that
understanding, we are working with the FBI to physically doublecheck each recording. If we identify any
discoverable recordings that have not already been produced, we will promptly provide them to you.
The segregation of highly confidential material will require the FBI and an AUSA to physically review each item to
confirm the item's status. We will endeavor to do so by your requested date of April 5, 2021.
We can confirm that neither the AUSA(s) nor the agent(s) will record or attempt to record any part of the
evidence review or conversations among the defense team or with the defendant during this review. Although
the evidence cannot be left outside of the presence of an agent, we will ensure that a room is available for the
defense team and the defendant to confer privately away from the agent(s) and the AUSA(s) without monitoring.
As for your request for a space large enough to fit 8 members of the defense team, the defendant, an agent, an
AUSA, and the evidence, my office cannot control the space that the Marshals allow us to use at 500 Pearl
outside of the proffer rooms. We will certainly request as large a space as possible, but if we are required to use
the proffer rooms, then members of the defense team may need to rotate in and out of the room. I know
members of the defense team have been in those proffer rooms before, and they can hopefully provide some
thoughts on how we might use the proffer room space effectively for your purposes. If the Court grants
authorization for the defense to bring electronic devices into 500 Pearl, that is certainly fine with the
Government, and you may note our consent in your request to Judge Nathan for such authorization.
Highly Confidential Electronic Images
The 2,100 electronic images were recovered during the responsiveness review of images and videos seized from
Jeffrey Epstein's devices, which review was not complete until early November 2020. We indicated on page 4 the
cover letter to our November 9, 2020 production, which included all other images and videos from those devices,
that "the Federal Bureau of Investigation ('FBI') seized multiple nude and partially nude images from several for
the above-listed electronic devices. All such images have been designated Highly Confidential. The FBI will make
these images available for review by the defense upon request." We did not receive a request from the defense
to review these images until your March 8, 2021 letter, which requested to "view and inspect all materials
designated by your office as 'Highly Confidential' under the terms of the Protective Order".
We did not ask the FBI to bring the 7 hard copy images to the MDC in the fall because we did not understand you
to be requesting a review of physical, non-electronic evidence during those meetings. Our understanding of the
defense request at that time was to review the electronic highly confidential images that were recovered from
EFTA00015813

=== Page 11 ===
CDs from Epstein's residence. We will ensure that the 7 hard copy images are available to you for review at 500
Pearl.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2021 5:19 PM
To:
>;
)
>;
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
All,
We have considered your proposal. Unfortunately, it does not permit us an adequate ability to review the evidence in
the case and does not permit our client to meaningfully participate in her own defense.
First, we are unable to meaningfully review the evidence without the benefit of our laptops and other electronic devices
which are needed to take notes of our review. We also need access to our devices during the review to compare the
physical evidence with the electronic discovery and with our work product.
Second, we need to provide our client the ability to review all discovery, including any recordings, in order to assist in
her own defense. Presuming that she will not be taken to the FBI downtown office, then your proposal offers no means
by which she can both inspect a recording in its physical form and listen to the recording at the same time.
In order to address the deficiencies in your proposal, we believe the following are necessary:
Physical Evidence
All of the physical evidence currently located in the FBI Bronx warehouse will be transported to 500 Pearl Street
and made available during the week of April 12, with our client present, in a room sufficiently large to
accommodate 8 attorneys and investigators.
We do not need the "bulky" massage tables transported; if there are any other extremely large evidence
pieces, let us know what they are and we can consider whether we can have someone review and
photograph those at the Bronx warehouse at an earlier time.
From your email, it appears that only two items are not located at the Bronx warehouse - both envelopes
with cash. Please confirm this. We do not need the two "cash" evidence items transported to 500 Pearl.
If there are other evidence items housed somewhere other than the Bronx, please let us know what they
are and where they are.
We will be permitted to bring our laptops, and a camera, into 500 Pearl Street; we are happy to seek permission
from Judge Nathan to do so.
Either the FBI can provide the equipment necessary to listen to any of the recordings at 500 Pearl Street or we
can bring the necessary equipment. If we are to provide the equipment, we will need to know in advance the
EFTA00015814

=== Page 12 ===
formats of each recording so that we can be prepared. You can note that on your Excel spreadsheet by the item
number by March 29 to give us adequate time to secure the necessary equipment.
The FBI can segregate any physical evidence that you deem "highly confidential." You can identify any "highly
confidential" physical evidence items on your Excel spreadsheets by April 5 (one week before the evidence view).
If we need to photograph or reproduce any such item for expert evaluation, we will seek leave of court.
Otherwise, we will not photograph any such items during the review during the week of April 12. This will ensure
the evidence review proceeds smoothly and there will not be any need to ask permission to photograph on an
item by item basis.
The FBI also can segregate any recordings which we will be able to inspect, but not listen to, during the evidence
view the week of April 12. You can note such designation on your Excel spreadsheet. If we disagree, we can seek
leave of the Court in advance.
We understand that an FBI Agent and/or AUSA may be present during our physical evidence review at 500 Pearl
Street but of course must ensure that no recordings are made of our conversations and also ensure that there is a
separate, secure room in which we can confer with our client during the evidence view without monitoring by the
government.
Please confirm whether all electronic recordings (other than the highly-confidential images and videos described
below) have previously been produced to us, and if not, please explain which ones were not produced by the
discovery deadlines last fall and why.
Highly Confidential Electronic Evidence
Can you please explain why 2,100 + 7 "highly confidential" images have not been shared with us yet? It was our
understanding that you previously provided all "highly confidential" images to our client - and to defense counsel
- for review at the MDC in November. We are confused about where these previously undisclosed items were
located and why they have not yet been made available for inspection and review.
During the week of April 19, Ms. Maxwell should be produced to 500 Pearl Street to review (with counsel and a
defense staff member, on the 1 laptop provided) all of the 5,507 electronic images and video marked "highly
confidential". These should be segregated into the three categories you describe (never-before produced,
previously produced, and the 7 hard-copy images).
Please let us know if you will not agree to any of these steps so that we can address the issues with the Court.
Thank you.
Laura A. Menninger Partner
Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C.
150 E. 10th Avenue Denver, CO 80203
+1 303 831 7364 (Office)
lmenninger@hmflaw.com
From:
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 4:40 PM
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
i
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com; 'BOBBI c STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
All,
Attached please find two spreadsheets documenting all physical evidence in the FBI's custody, as well as a corresponding
discovery cover letter. We are sending a copy of these files to the MDC for your client as well.
In response to your questions, the FBI has informed me of the following:
Regarding the Highly Confidential nude/partially nudge images to be reviewed at 500 Pearl:
EFTA00015815

=== Page 13 ===
There are three categories of these images:
Approximately 2,100 electronic images and videos seized from Epstein's electronic devices (which have not
been previously provided to you)
Approximately 3,400 electronic images from discs seized from Epstein's residences in 2019 (which have
previously been provided to you and your client for review at the MDC)
Approximately 7 hard copy nude images located in the file from the FBI Florida office's investigation of
Epstein (which have not been previously provided to you)
The FBI will make all three of those categories available to you. The electronic files will be provided on hard
drives, and the FBI will provide you with the hard copy images for review as well.
All electronic images should be viewable as thumbnails, except those seized from Apple devices, which
must be viewed using Cellebrite.
The Cellebrite software will be provided on the drive for your review of images and videos seized from
Apple devices.
The electronic files have the same metadata on the hard drive that was available when the FBI seized each
image. For images that were carved or deleted, no metadata was recovered, so none is viewable. For all
other images, the metadata recovered should be viewable on the hard drive.
The approximately 2,100 electronic images and videos seized from Epstein's devices are separated by
folder to indicate which device each image was seized from.
Because these images are considered obscene material, the FBI is not permitted to make duplicates of them, and
there is a limited number of clean laptops on which these images can be reviewed. As a result, the FBI is only
able to provide a single laptop for review of these images.
Regarding the physical evidence:
Attached are two lists of all physical items in the FBI's custody relating to this case. The first list relates to items
associated with the FBI Florida office's investigation of Epstein. The second list relates to items associated with
the FBI New York office's current investigation.
The vast majority of physical evidence in the FBI's custody is located at the FBI's warehouse in the Bronx. Two
items (1B 77 & 1B 79) are located at 26 Federal Plaza, but the case agents can check those items out from 26
Federal Plaza and bring them to the Bronx warehouse on whatever day you choose to conduct your review so
that you will have all evidence in one place.
The FBI is able to arrange for the defense team to review all physical evidence at the Bronx warehouse under the
following conditions:
The warehouse requires at least two weeks' notice in order to pull all of the items for the entire case and
place them in a location where a large group of people can view them.
The warehouse is open during normal business hours between 9am and 5pm on weekdays.
At least two FBI agents and an AUSA will be present at the Bronx warehouse to assist and answer
questions.
The evidence will be placed in a loading dock at the warehouse to provide additional space for the review.
To ensure that there is sufficient space, please let me know how many members of the defense team
intend to be physically present for this review.
Electronic devices such as cellphones and laptops are not permitted in the warehouse. The defense team
may bring a digital camera that is not connected to the Internet or a cellular network into the warehouse.
If the defense team wishes to photograph an item of evidence, the defense will need to inform the agents
who are present, so that they may confirm that the photographed item is not Highly Confidential based on
the presence of nudity.
Electronic media such as VHS tapes, cassette tapes, and CDs will not be playable at the warehouse.
To the extent the defense requests that the FBI bring any physical items to 500 Pearl Street for your client to
review, the FBI is prepared to bring items that are reasonably sized to 500 Pearl Street. With respect to bulky or
large items, the defense team should be able to photograph those for your client to review, unless they are
deemed Highly Confidential, in which case the FBI can make arrangements to transport the item to 500 Pearl
Street if necessary.
The FBI is in the process of confirming that it can provide devices to play all of the electronic media in the case in
a single location at the FBI's offices in downtown Manhattan. We are also double-checking to confirm that all
media that does not contain witness statements have already been produced to you and your client in discovery.
EFTA00015816

=== Page 14 ===
The FBI anticipates that we can arrange for you to review all non-witness statement electronic media at the FBI's
office in downtown Manhattan in approximately three weeks.
To the extent you wish to review all of the discs containing photographs, which were seized from Epstein's
residences in 2019, we note that all of those images have already been produced to you in discovery. For
your awareness, the FBI has informed me that it took their team several weeks to review all of the images
on all of those discs.
Please let me know how you wish to proceed.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From:
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 6:00 PM
To: 'Laura Menninger' <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
-
is
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Laura,
I expect to be able to answer all of your questions about the evidence review by tomorrow.
We have been looking into the discovery request you made last week, and we hope to have a response ready to provide
to you by next week.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 3:01 PM
To:
)
is
)
is
(USANYS)
EFTA00015817

=== Page 15 ===
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Now that the FBI team is back, when do you expect to have answers to all of the questions posed? If I had an idea of
when you would have answers, it could help me answer your question.
At a minimum, it would not seem to take too much time to know when someone can open the FBI vault and allow the
attorneys to make an initial view of the evidence. Also, I understand the FBI did not prepare an inventory of their
evidence when they seized it from NY and LSJ, so I don't think we need to wait for them to now prepare an inventory
before we start reviewing evidence.
Also, when do you believe you will have a response regarding the discovery I requested last Monday?
Thanks,
Laura
Laura A. Menninger I Partner
Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C.
150 E. 10th Avenue I Denver, CO 80203
+1 303 831 7364 (Office)
Imenninger@hmflaw.com
From:
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 11:44 AM
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
)
is
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Counsel,
The FBI team on this case has been out of the office this week and will not be able to answer all of the questions you
asked during our Wednesday call until they are back in the office next week. Please let me know if you would like to
wait until all of those questions can be answered to schedule a day for your client to be brought to 500 Pearl Street to
review the highly confidential images. My understanding is that the FBI is able to provide at least one laptop containing
those highly confidential images in time for such a review to take place on Thursday 5/18, but I may not have the
answers to all of your questions about those images before that date, and I do not know whether you will also be able to
visit the evidence vault that same week.
Please let me know how you would like to proceed. I will reach back out once I have answers to your questions.
Thank you,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
EFTA00015818

=== Page 16 ===
From:
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 4:56 PM
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
)
>;
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI c STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
That is the only excel spreadsheet indexing physical evidence that we have produced in discovery. That spreadsheet
does not include every physical item currently in the FBI's custody related to this case. For example, the August 20, 2020
discovery production also included search warrant returns listing the physical items seized by the FBI's New York Office
during the 2019 searches of Jeffrey Epstein's residences in New York and the U.S Virgin Islands (see Bates range
SDNY_GM_00166007-SDNY_GM_00166043), but they are not contained in a spreadsheet.
As a courtesy, I have asked the FBI whether it would be possible to provide us with a similar excel index reflecting the
physical evidence seized by the FBI's New York Office, though it may take some time to compile such an index.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 3:44 PM
To:
)
is
)
i
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI c STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Thank you. Is that the only index of physical evidence available?
Laura A. Menninger I Partner
Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C.
150 E. 10th Avenue I Denver, CO 80203
+1 303 831 7364 (Office)
lmenninger@hmflaw.com
From:
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 1:38 PM
EFTA00015819

=== Page 17 ===
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
)
is
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Counsel,
In advance of our call tomorrow, I wanted to send a copy of the attached index of physical items in FBI custody from the
FBI-Miami office, which we previously produced to you as part of our August 21, 2020 discovery production. Also
included in that August 21, 2020 production were scans of numerous items listed on the index. Those scans can be
found within Bates range SDNY_GM_00172218-SDNY_GM_00173007. It may be useful to reference some of those
items during our conversation tomorrow, so I wanted to make sure you were aware of them.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From:
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 2:03 PM
To: 'Laura Menninger' <lmenninger@hmflaw.com>;
)
is
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Yes, that works for us, thank you very much. We can use the below dial-in:
Dial-in:
Code:
Best,
From: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 11:19 AM
To:
)
>;
)
is
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com>; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Good morning,
EFTA00015820

=== Page 18 ===
We are free at 1:30 p.m. ET / 11:30 a.m. MST tomorrow. Would that work? We are generally free thereafter, so please
suggest another later time if not.
Thank you,
Laura
Laura A. Menninger I Partner
Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C.
150 E. 10th Avenue I Denver, CO 80203
+1 303 831 7364 (Office)
lmenninger@hmflaw.com
From:
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 8:36 AM
To: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>;
)
i
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: RE: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Good morning,
It would be helpful to have a call to discuss the requests contained in this letter. Are there times tomorrow when you
would be available to speak, please?
Thank you,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From: Laura Menninger <Imenninger@hmflaw.com>
Sent: Monday, March 8, 2021 2:03 PM
To:
is
)
i
(USANYS)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca <jpagliuca@hmflaw.com>; Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP (ceverdell@cohengresser.com)
<ceverdell@cohengresser.com; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' <bcsternheim@mac.com>
Subject: US V. Maxwell - 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Request to view evidence, highly confidential materials, scenes
Counsel -
Please see attached correspondence.
-Laura
EFTA00015821

=== Page 19 ===
Laura A. Menninger
Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C.
150 East 10th Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80203
<image001.jpg>
Main 303.831.7364 FX 303.832.2628
Imenninger@hmflaw.com
www.hmflaw.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages
attached to it may contain information that is confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you
must not read this transmission and that any disclosure, copying, printing, distribution or use of any of the
information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this
transmission in error, please notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete the original
transmission and its attachments without reading or saving it in any manner. Thank you.
EFTA00015822


c1: EFTA00017742
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00017742.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
(USANYS)
]"
Subject: RE: https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#/report/f1122092-95a8-4096-9a07-bc9472b46364
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 17:50:23 +0000
Sure, will do.
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 12:28 PM
To:
(USANYS)
is
(USANYS)
Subject: RE: https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#/report/f1122092-95a8-4096-9a07-bc9472b46364
Can you do a chart and compare with Avenatti and Epstein announcements?
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 12:12 PM
To:
(USANYS)
i
(USANYS)
Subject: https://app.criticalmention.com/app/#/report/f1122092-95a8-4096-9a07-bc9472b46364
Quick media report on yesterday's coverage.
Public Affairs
United States Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney's Office I Southern District of New York
I
Mobile:
I
Press Office:
EFTA00017742


c1: EFTA00014657
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014657.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To: "Stoddart, Allison"
Subject: Accepted: United States V. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 21:54:33 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: unnamed
EFTA00014657


c1: EFTA00014312
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014312.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: Joe Nascimento
To:
"
)"
Cc:
)"
"
)"
Subject: Re:
)
- Epstein
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 15:41:57 +0000
I have bad service. We are sitting by the coffee shop/restaurant
Joseph E. Nascimento, Esq.
ROSS AMSEL RABEN NASCIMENTO, PLLC
p.
f.
e.
www.crimlawfirm.com
From:
"
)"
Date: Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 9:07 PM
To: Joe Nascimento
Cc:
)"
,
)"
Subject: RE:
)
- Epstein
Hi Joe,
We will be at the Hilton in West Palm Beach, at 600 Okeechobee Blvd. Please call me when you are here, and we will meet
you in the lobby.
Thanks,
From: Joe Nascimento
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 9:02 PM
To:
Cc:
is
Subject: Re:
)
- Epstein
Good evening,
Have you set a location for our meeting tomorrow?
Thanks,
Joe
EFTA00014312

=== Page 2 ===
Sent from my iPhone
Joseph E. Nascimento, Esq.
ROSS AMSEL RABEN NASCIMENTO, PLLC
t.
f.
e.
www.crimlawfirm.com
On Jul 10, 2019, at 12:03 PM,
)
wrote:
Thank you, we will plan to see you then in West Palm Beach. We are still coordinating logistics, and we will let
you know that morning the address where we should meet.
Since we will be traveling, please feel free to call my cell if you need to reach us for any reason:
Thanks,
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 10, 2019, at 11:39 AM, Joe Nascimento
<mailto:
wrote:
Of course
Sent from my iPhone
Joseph E. Nascimento, Esq.
ROSS AMSEL RABEN NASCIMENTO, PLLC
t.
<tel:
f.
<tel:
e.
<mailto:
www.crimlawfirm.com<http://www.crimlawfirm.com/
On Jul 10, 2019, at 11:34 AM,
<mailto:
wrote:
Joe,
Would it be possible to meet earlier, perhaps at noon on Friday? Thank you.
Sent from my iPhone
EFTA00014313

=== Page 3 ===
On Jul 9, 2019, at 10:51 PM, Joe Nascimento
<mailto:
<mailto:
wrote:
,
Can we meet Friday, early afternoon (around 1-1:30)? Please send me your proffer letter.
Thanks,
Joe
Sent from my iPhone
Joseph E. Nascimento, Esq.
ROSS AMSEL RABEN NASCIMENTO, PLLC
t.
<tel:
f.
<tel:
e.
<mailto:
<mailto:
www.crimlawfirm.com http://www.crimlawfirm.com http://www.crimlawfirm.com/
On Jul 9, 2019, at 4:56 PM,
)
mailto:
<mailto:
wrote:
Joe,
We ended up slotting in a few things in the interim, but we're still good for 6:30 for sure.
thanks,
From: Joe Nascimento
mailto:
<mailto:
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 16:43
To:
)
<mailto:
<mailto:
Cc:
<mailto:
<mailto:
)
<mailto:
mailto:
Subject: Re:
)
- Epstein
Hi
,
I got done a little earlier today - do you want to bump up our call time?
Sent from my iPhone
EFTA00014314

=== Page 4 ===
Joseph E. Nascimento, Esq.
ROSS AMSEL RABEN NASCIMENTO, PLLC
t.
<tel:
f.
<tel:
e.
<mailto:
<mailto:
www.crimlawfirm.com http://www.crimlawfirm.com http://www.crimlawfirm.com/
On Jul 9, 2019, at 10:02 AM, Joe Nascimento
mailto:
<mailto:
wrote:
Hi
,
Are you still free for a call?
Joseph E. Nascimento, Esq.
ROSS AMSEL RABEN NASCIMENTO, PLLC
p.
f.
e.
<mailto:
<mailto:
www.crimlawfirm.com http://www.crimlawfirm.com http://www.crimlawfirm.com
From:
)"
<mailto:
<mailto:
Date: Sunday, July 7, 2019 at 10:19 PM
To: Joe Nascimento
<mailto:
<mailto:
Cc:
<mailto:
<mailto:
)"
<mailto:
mailto:
Subject: RE:
)
- Epstein
Joe,
Sure, thanks - and yes, quite the weekend. If it's alright with you, let's do 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday - you can
reach us at
,
or we can also call you then if that's easier, whatever you prefer.
thanks,
From: Joe Nascimento
<mailto:
<mailto:
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2019 18:51
EFTA00014315

=== Page 5 ===
To:
<mailto:
<mailto:
Cc:
<mailto:
<mailto:
)
<mailto:
mailto:
Subject: Re:
)
- Epstein
Hi
,
No need to take any more time out of what I'm sure was a busy weekend for you. Let's set a time for Tuesday
morning (the earlier the better for me). Let me know what works for you.
Thanks,
Joe
Sent from my iPhone
Joseph E. Nascimento, Esq.
ROSS AMSEL RABEN NASCIMENTO, PLLC
t.
<tel:
f.
<tel:
e.
<mailto:
<mailto:
www.crimlawfirm.com-http//www.crimlawfirm.com -http:/www.crimlawfirm.com/
On Jul 7, 2019, at 4:04 PM,
)
<mailto:
<mailto:
wrote:
Joe,
Thank you for reaching out, and we would be happy to schedule a time to speak with you. I expect our
schedules may be somewhat unpredictable tomorrow; would it work to set a time to talk on Tuesday? We can
schedule it for before you meet with
,
if that's helpful. Or if you'd like to talk sooner, we could
schedule a time later today, or check in tomorrow about a possible afternoon discussion. Please let us know
what you prefer, and we look forward to being in touch.
thank you,
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York
From: Joe Nascimento
<mailto:
<mailto:
Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2019 22:55
EFTA00014316

=== Page 6 ===
To:
)
<mailto:
<mailto:
Subject:
)
- Epstein
Begin forwarded message:
From:
<mailto:
<mailto:
Date: July 6, 2019 at 10:51:09 PM EDT
To:
<mailto:
<mailto:
<mailto:
mailto:
<mailto:
<mailto:
Cc:
<mailto:
<mailto:
Subject:
)
- Epstein
My former partner, Alan Ross, represented
), prior to his passing in 2018.
Agent
served
with a grand jury subpoena earlier today, and as Alan's former partner and
FL Bar appointed inventory attorney, she has contacted me. Unfortunately, I am unable to meet with her until
Tuesday, but I would appreciate a few minutes of your time at your convenience as I am getting up to speed.
Please let me know what day/time is best for you.
Look forward to speaking with you.
Best,
Joe
Joseph E. Nascimento, Esq.
ROSS AMSEL RABEN NASCIMENTO, PLLC
t.
<tel:
f.
<tel:
e.
<mailto:
<mailto:
www.crimlawfirm.com http://www.crimlawfirm.com--http://www.crimlawfirm.com/
EFTA00014317


c1: EFTA00016026
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016026.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
Cc:
)"
)"
Subject: RE: Extradition question
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 16:11:25 +0000
Attachments: Extradition_Section_Draft_(12.15.20).docx
Inline-Images: image003.png; image001.png
Attached is the portion of the current draft related to extradition. If there is anything we should discuss or that seems
inaccurate in any way, please let us know. Thanks again for your help.
Best,
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 11:52 AM
To:
Cc:
is
Subject: RE: Extradition question
Thanks,
I wanted to confirm that this link contains the current extradition act:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/41. I know you had sent a PDF of the act, but given the volume of the
document, I wanted to include a link instead should the Court choose to take a look. We will let you know if we have any
additional questions as we are finalizing the document. Thanks again for all of your help - we really appreciate it.
Best,
From:
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 8:02 AM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
>;
)
Subject: RE: Extradition question
I got caught up in a bunch of stuff on Friday. Do you have additional questions or are you good to go?
Thx,
US Department of Justice Attaché
United States Embassy
EFTA00016026

=== Page 2 ===
SBU -LAW ENFORCEMENT
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 2:42 PM
To
Cc:
is
Subject: RE: Extradition question
Thanks,
Would 10 am work? I'm at 646-612-0825.
From:
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 3:40 AM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
is
Subject: Re: Extradition question
Let me know when you get in today and I'll give you a call. I'm around today until around noon your time with
one call at 10:30 - -11.
Sent from a mobile device
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 6:48:58 AM
To:
Cc:
is
Subject: RE: Extradition question
Thanks so much,
If you could send along those provisions or any additional thoughts, that would be much
appreciated. I also have a few follow up questions. Would you have time for a call sometime Friday, please? Thanks
again for your assistance.
From:
)
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 6:12 PM
To:
(USANYS)
is
Subject: Fwd: Extradition question
Begin forwarded message:
From:
Date: December 10, 2020 at 5:36:54 AM EST
To:
)"
Cc: "Chadwick, Amanda J (London)
EFTA00016027

=== Page 3 ===
Subject: FW: Extradition question
Here is the feedback from the Crown Prosecution Service. As noted, a consent in the US would not be binding
on a court in the UK. (I can pull the relevant Extradition Act provisions cited below) While I suggested in our
call this is like the kind of colloquy necessary for a guilty plea, I am reminded that consent to extradited is
irrevocable and not appealable - no so with a plea.
I will try to write something up today, but my DOJ computer has been acting up.
From: Anne-Marie Kundert
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:22:36 AM (UTC+00:00) Dublin, Edinburgh, Lisbon, London
To:
Cc: Punam Chopra (Sensitive)
Subject: RE: Extradition question
Dear all
The standard principle is that extradition should be sought only where it is necessary and proportionate to do so. If a RP
indicated a willingness to fully abide by conditions of bail etc then it would be a matter for the US authorities as to
whether to accept those terms. If the RP returned to the UK but then reneged on the deal, then the failure to comply
with such undertakings would inevitably lead to a Request for extradition and would be a factor on whether the person
is detained on bail or in custody. If the RP was to offer a consent, the Judge in court would need to satisfy himself that
the RP had received appropriate legal advice because it is irrevocable and there is no ground of appeal. The SSHD
would then have 2 months to arrange the surrender. The only consent that matters is the one before the extradition
judge in the UK and it will usually be determined at the initial hearing but can be offered at any time before the
extradition hearing has concluded. There is no caselaw on this to my mind but the relevant statutory provisions are S 72
(7)(b) and 72(8) for full order, s74 (7)(b) and s74 (8) for provisional arrest and s127 and s128 on consent- irrevocable
point/legal advice and sending of case to SSHD.
Hope this helps!
Anne-marie
Anne-Marie Kundert, Unit Head, Extradition
International Justice and Organised Crime Division
Crown Prosecution Service
SBU -LAW ENFORCEMENT
EFTA00016028

=== Page 4 ===
From:
Sent: 09 December 2020 13:31
To
Cc: Punam Chopra (Sensitive) <
; Anne-Marie Kundert
Subject: RE: Extradition question
Dear
Thanks for your email.
I think the difficulty here is as you mention - the consent given to the US authorities would not be binding on the RP in
the UK or on the UK court. Consent to extradition must be given irrevocably in writing to the UK court under s72 (8)
Extradition Act 2003. In other words what the RP is offering in the US is a promise to consent before the UK court, which
is unenforceable.
I hope that assists - I don't have a case to hand. Anne-Marie returns tomorrow and may be able to add.
Regards
I
I
Unit Head
Extradition Unit International Justice and Organised Crime Division 102 Petty France
London SW1H 9EA I DX: 161330 Westminster 11
CPS
From
Sent: 09 December 2020 12:16
To
Cc: Punam Chopra (Sensitive)
; Anne-Marie Kundert
Subject: RE: Extradition question
Hi
I got a bounce back from Anne-Marie. Any thoughts on this?
Many thanks,
From:
Sent: Wednesday, December 9. 2020 12:11 PM
To: Anne-Marie Kundert
Cc: Punam Chopra (Sensitive)
Subject: Extradition question
Dear Anne-Marie - I hope you are well. It has been too long since we have talked!
I have a UK extradition question which has been raised by a UK citz facing a US crime and currently
being detained in the US. The defendant is seeking bail in the US and wants to execute a
prophylactic "consent to be extradited" from the UK as proof that he is not a flight risk.
EFTA00016029

=== Page 5 ===
My understanding of UK law is that even if a defendant consents to be extradited, a UK judge still
has to independently be satisfied that the extradition comports with UK law. So, for instance, if the
defendant is released, flees to the UK, and then faces UK extradition, that consent may be evidence,
but a UK judge would still have to decide on all factors potentially applicable at the time of the
extradition. (The defendant may also claim that his prophylactic consent was coerced by his
condition in the US.) Do I have that right? Is there a case or two which I can cite which stands for
that proposition?
Many thanks!
Best,
U.S. Department of Justice Attaché
United States Embassy - London
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
This e-mail is private and is intended only for the addressee and any copy recipients.
Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted.
If you are not an intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-
mail and delete this message and any attachments without retaining a copy.
Activity and use of departmental systems and the Criminal Justice Extranet is monitored
to secure their effective operation and for other lawful business purposes.
Communications using these systems will also be monitored and may be recorded to secure
effective operation and for other lawful business purposes.
Л
CPS
EFTA00016030


c1: EFTA00015645
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015645.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
(USANYS)"
To:
"
- US"
Cc:
- US"
"
)"
(USANYS)"
(USANYS)"
)"
(USANYS)"
Subject: Delivery/Task order no. 15JA5421F00000068
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 18:23:49 +0000
Attachments: Task_order.pdf
Inline-Images: image001.jpg; image003.jpg
Hi
Attached is a task order for CACI - Commercial services (scanning/document management) under GS-25F-
0131M; please retain for your records.
The period of performance of this contract is from 3/24/2021 - 5/31/2021. The total estimated value of this
contract is
If you have any contract related questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Please email all invoices and payment related questions to
Remember to include
the following information on your invoice correspondence:
Task order# 15JA5421F00000068
Reference# R21NYS18013
DEPARTMENT OF
Contract Specialist (FAC-C/COR III)
U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York
86 Chambers St. /New York, N.Y. 10007
T:
|
F:
I
E-Mail:
EFTA00015645


c1: EFTA00014464
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014464.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
)"
To:
"
(
)"
Subject: Accepted: Epstein Op Meeting with FBI
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 17:39:28 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: unnamed
EFTA00014464


c1: EFTA00016496
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016496.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS) [Contractor]"
To:
)"
Subject: Preliminary instructions
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 21:56:53 +0000
Attachments: AJN_draft_instructions.pdf
Is the attached what you were referring to just now? Couldn't find it on the shared (apologies if I missed it) but pulled
from pacer.
Paralegal Specialist
U.S. Attorney's Office I SDNY
1 Saint Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
Office:
Cell:
EFTA00016496


c1: EFTA00016608
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016608.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Event: Meet on Epstein
Start Date: 2019-09-17 19:30:00 +0000
End Date: 2019-09-17 20:00:00 +0000
Organizer:
Class: X-PERSONAL
Date Created: 2019-09-17 23:04:28 +0000
Date Modified: 2019-09-17 23:04:28 +0000
Priority: 5
DTSTAMP: 2019-09-17 13:37:55 +0000
Attendee:
EFTA00016608


c1: EFTA00015878
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015878.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Bcc: "USAHUB-USAJournal111"
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - RE: Ghislaine Maxwell Triggerfish
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:05:20 +0000
Embedded: RE: [EXTERNAL_EMAIL] - RE: Ghislaine_Maxwell_Triggerfish.msg
Sender:
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - RE: Ghislaine Maxwell Triggerfish
Message-Id:
<SN5P110MB05426EFA688683F697249B3492D90@SN5P110MB0542.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
EFTA00015878


c1: EFTA00016832
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016832.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Fact Witness Travel Request (Domestic Witness Travel)
AUSA, see instructions below.
To:
SDNY Victim/Witness Unit
From: AUSA
Date: January 30, 2020
Re:
United States V. Ghislaine Maxwell
Court Docket No: N/A
)
Witness Name:
Witness DOB:
(Name/DOB as printed here will be forwarded to travel agency and then to TSA and must exactly
match the witness's driver's license or other travel ID or TSA will not permit the witness to fly.)
Witness Address:
Witness TelNos (mobile):
Witness e-mail:
Witness Needed to Appear in SDNY on
Date: February 7, 2020
Time: 10 AM
Witness Needed to Appear for:
Trial ( )
Date:
Grand Jury ( )
Date:
Trial/GJ Prep (X)
Date: February 7, 2020
Estimated Dates Witness will Arrive: February 6, 2020
Depart: February 7, 2020
Is the person a Fact Witness and not an Expert Witness?
(Yes/No):
Yes
Current Federal Civilian or Military Employee?
(Yes/No):
No
Is the Witness Facing Criminal Charges?
(Yes/No):
No
Does the Witness Reside Outside the Continental United States?
(Yes/No):
No
Is this Witness a Victim-Witness?
(Yes/No):
No
Hotel Required?
(Yes/No):
Yes
Has the Witness advised you of any unusual travel expenses?
(Yes/No):
No
Unusual expenses of fact witnesses can include
special travel arrangements
rev. 2019.11.19
EFTA00016832

=== Page 2 ===
care for dependent child or incapacitated family member left at home
kennel fees for pets
necessary travel companion
extra baggage (more than one bag)
Please describe the unusual expense:
For Victim-Witness Coordinator:
1. (For UEFW other than travel, which must be itemized and approved in advance:) This UEFW
is apparently within VWC approval authority and tentatively approved pending receipt(s) for
UEFW expenses (Yes/No):
2. Other VWC comments:
VWC Initials and Date:
Instructions to AUSA:
Use this form for all fact witnesses within the U.S. except government employees and military
personnel, for whom a Request for Armed Forces or Government-Employee Witness should
be used.
For foreign witnesses, use the International Witness Travel Request. Complete an Early or
Extended stay memo if the witness is being brought in more than 3 business days prior to
court/GJ testimony.
Witnesses may only be brought in under the FEWS appropriation for grand jury testimony that
has been scheduled and where the witness is expected to testify before the grand jury; court
testimony; or preparation for same. Any other witness travel, e.g., for investigative interviews,
must be covered by the investigating component from litigative funds. See Ed Tyrrell.
See generally DOJ Instruction 1300.01.01 (approved 9/28/2018) and sources referenced
therein.
rev. 2019.11.19
EFTA00016833


c1: EFTA00015693
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015693.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: Epstein Trust Discussion
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 13:48:21 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: unnamed
-- Do not delete or change any of the following text. --
When it's time, join your Webex meeting here.
Meeting number (access code):
Meeting password:
Join meeting
Tap to join from a mobile device (attendees only)
USA Toll 2
US Toll
Join by phone
USA Toll 2
US Toll
Global call-in numbers
Join from a video system or application
Dial
You can also dial
and enter your meeting number.
Join using Microsoft Lync or Microsoft Skype for Business
Dial
If you are a host, click here to view host information.
EFTA00015693

=== Page 2 ===
Need help? Go to http://help.webex.com
EFTA00015694


c1: EFTA00015134
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015134.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
Subject: RE: E-TICKET RECEIPT -
- Travel Date: 26AUG19 - Ref: XHKCBU
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 11:07:29 +0000
Hi
I only have airfare for 8 people and I am missing the ticketed one for
Please send me the ones I am missing from this list.
Also, please send me the hotel reservations.
Thanks,
08/26/2019
08/27/2019
West Palm FL to NYC Epstein Case
SAOIQH
$642.24
08/26/2019
08/28/2019
Los Angeles, CA to NYC- Epstein Case
EZMJDU
$664.23
08/26/2019
08/27/2019
Fort Lauderdale, FL to NYC- Epstein Case
MKMBSL
$568.23
08/26/2019
08/27/2019
Dayton, OH to NYC. Epstein Case
EYILTM
$ 346.22
08/26/2019
08/27/2019
Los Angeles, CA to NYC- Epstein Case
HVDEOP
$ 489.23
08/25/2019
08/28/2019
Washington, DC/Seattle - Epstein Case
GVTGXZ
$ 496.43
08/26/2019
08/27/2019
Las Vegas to NYC. - Epstein Case
XHKCBU
$524.23
08/26/2019
08/28/2019
Barcelona, Spain to NYC- Epstein Case
QWLVNR
$ 1,429.02
From: USANYS-Fact Witness Travel
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2019 4:59 PM
To:
(USANYS);
(USANYS);
(USANYS);
(USANYS)
Subject: Fwd: E-TICKET RECEIPT
- Travel Date: 26AUG19 - Ref: XHKCBU
This is number 13
Total cost airfare approximately $8,000
In airfare.
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From:
Date: August 25, 2019 at 3:56:16 PM EDT
To:
Subject: E-TICKET RECEIPT -
- Travel Date: 26AUG19 - Ref: XHKCBU
**DO NOT DELETE** For voucher processing, please retain the attached Eticket Receipt / Invoice (zero dollar invoices are no longer available).
This is an automated email notification. Please do not respond to this email address. This mailbox is not monitored and emails sent to this box will not
be received or worked.
**Did you know we can also book your hotels and rental cars?**
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or proprietary information. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender
immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail and any attachments; any further use of such e-mail or attachments is strictly prohibited.
EFTA00015134


c1: EFTA00015642
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015642.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
Subject: Memo for AUSA
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:14:52 +0000
Attachments:
-_Memo.pdf
Inline-Images: image001.png
Urgent. Please send the below email and the attachment back to me.
The SDNY requests approval for travel by AUSA
to the U.K. from October 12 to October 17, 2020. This travel is
required at this time as
will be conducting an interview of victim/witness in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell.
The victim was a victim of Jeffrey Epstein. She will only talk to us person and it is necessary for us to get her statement on
the record to preserve the government's right to use her at trial.
Please issue an approval from EOUSA for her travel to the U.K.
Acting United States Attorney.
EFTA00015642


c1: EFTA00016757
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016757.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Event: Accepted: Epstein Meeting
Start Date: 2020-01-06 17:30:00 +0000
End Date: 2020-01-06 18:00:00 +0000
Class: X-PERSONAL
Comment:
Date Created: 2020-01-08 02:44:07 +0000
Date Modified: 2020-01-08 02:44:07 +0000
Priority: 5
DTSTAMP: 2020-01-06 16:10:28 +0000
Attendee:
EFTA00016757


c1: EFTA00014463
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014463.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Event: Epstein Op Meeting with FBI
Start Date: 2019-07-01 19:30:00 +0000
End Date: 2019-07-01 20:30:00 +0000
Organizer:
(USANYS)
Class: X-PERSONAL
Date Created: 2019-06-27 17:49:06 +0000
Date Modified: 2019-06-27 17:49:06 +0000
Priority: 5
DTSTAMP: 2019-06-27 17:39:02 +0000
Attendee:
(USANYS)
i
i
)
i
)
Alarm: Display the following message 15m before start
Reminder
EFTA00014463


c1: EFTA00015584
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015584.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From
To:
)"
Subject: Re: epstein
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 21:53:40 +0000
Importance: Normal
Fascinating article, not sure if I sent earlier:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/jeffrey-epsteins-sick-story-played-out-for-years-in-plain-sight
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 9, 2019, at 10:09 AM,
wrote:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/jeffrey-epstein-shouldnt-expect-to-wiggle-free-again-with-sdny-sex-trafficking-charges
From:
)
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 9:43 AM
To:
Subject: Fwd: epstein
The other one was from the second conference; this is from the first one
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Goretti Moya <gmoya@sdreporters.com>
Date: July 8, 2019 at 17:12:36 EDT
To:
=
:
>,
Subject: epstein
Please e-mail when youg et this
EFTA00015584


c1: EFTA00016179
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016179.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
JSANYS)"
Subject: FW: Premises SW
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 10:54:14 +0000
Attachments: SDNY_Premises_Search_Warrant_Bundle_(revised).pdf
It's paragraph 15 which says the phone was at the Subject Premises. That term is defined in paragraph 3 as an 156-acre
property that includes every structure on it. We even helpfully include pictures of all of them.
From:
)
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 6:22 AM
To:
(USANYS)
Subject: Premises SW
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
0007
EFTA00016179


c1: EFTA00015529
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015529.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
)"
To: "Berman, Geoffrey (USANYS)"
(USANYS)"
(USANYS)"
(USANYS)"
Cc:
(USANYS)"
(USANYS)"
)"
"
)"
Subject: RE: draft bail reply, Epstein
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 18:00:21 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: 2019-07-12,_JE,_response_to_bail_release_request,_draft_3.docx
Bail reply attached for review, incorporating input from our team and chiefs. Due at 5:00, though we're happy to file
earlier than that if it's set to go. l'll be in an interview for about the next hour but then back online. Thank you!
EFTA00015529


c1: EFTA00014708
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014708.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject: US V. Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Proposed Redactions
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 18:53:19 +0000
Attachments: 2021-11-20_GM_reply_re_GX-52_final_[proposed_redactions].pdf;
2021.11.15_JSP_Ltr_re_EX._52_[proposed_redactions].pdf;
2021.11.18_Mot_to_admit_birth_certificates_proposed_redactions].pdf:
2021.11.20_Letter_to_Judge_Nathan_re_Birth_Certificates_Iproposed_redactions].PDF
Chambers,
Attached are the proposed redactions referenced in the letter at Dkt. No. 486.
Respectfully submitted,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
EFTA00014708


c1: EFTA00014681
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014681.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
EXHIBIT B
EFTA00014681

=== Page 2 ===
sa I'm spexuted
Boss dight
me which to see
her who been almost a year- xary
Dears way weatting + might help
ment me into or pay for willege
up because / hate as Ssapo ntment
must to jit my was
but it would be really Cool it
it na prenert + even it it doesn t7
hiv, + 13 80 effect l get to go see
CONFIDENTIAL
SDNY_GM_00165986
EFTA00014682


c1: EFTA00016916
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016916.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: RE: Epstein -- travel approval form
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 19:52:59 +0000
Just freed up. I'm quickly eating something but could chew while we talk (or will be done shortly).
From:
Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2020 2:13 PM
To:
Subject: RE: Epstein -- travel approval form
Totally understand - no worries and we'll link up when you're able.
From:
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2020 14:12
To:
Subject: Re: Epstein -- travel approval form
Got it. I'm so sorry - tied up with Geoff.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 4, 2020, at 2:10 PM,
wrote:
I'm going to make some calls so if I don't pick up when you call, that's why, but I'm here and will get off the phone
and come down whenever you're available.
thanks,
From:
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2020 13:02
To:
Subject: Re: Epstein -- travel approval form
No problem, I'm around whenever you're back.
On Feb 4, 2020, at 12:44,
wrote:
I may run late. Don't come till I call!
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 3, 2020, at 5:45 PM,
wrote:
EFTA00016916

=== Page 2 ===
That works, thanks - just let me know if your schedule changes, otherwise l'll come by at 1:00 tomorrow. Thanks
again and looking forward to it.
From:
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2020 16:07
To:
Subject: RE: Epstein -- travel approval form
Right now 1 p.m. looks open.
From:
Sent: Monday, February 3, 2020 1:33 PM
To:
Subject: RE: Epstein -- travel approval form
No problem at all, and I'm very flexible tomorrow afternoon - whatever time is good for you I can make work, so just
let me know and l'll put it in the calendar.
From:
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2020 13:31
To:
Subject: RE: Epstein -- travel approval form
So sorry for the delay. Maybe tomorrow? I have time in the afternoon.
From:
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020 1:09 PM
To:
Subject: RE: Epstein -- travel approval form
Totally understand, and next week would be fine - let me know if it's helpful to set a time, and otherwise l'll touch
base midweek if we haven't connected by then.
And thanks very much re: the memo.
From:
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020 12:53
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: Epstein -- travel approval form
Already signed and sent upstairs
I will do my best to ensure signature immediately.
Re: this afternoon: it may be best to kick it to next week. If some time develops before 3, I'll let you know, but right
now it is iffy.
From:
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2020 12:21 PM
EFTA00016917

=== Page 3 ===
To:
Cc:
Subject: Epstein -- travel approval form
We dropped off the Sweden travel memo for you - we were unexpectedly significantly delayed in getting OIA
approval, but it finally came this morning, so with apologies for the short turnaround, hoping to get Office and final
DOJ approval this afternoon. Thank you!
And separately, if you still wanted to meet up today, I'll be around until about 3:00, but I'm also flexible next week if
that's easier.
thanks again,
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York
EFTA00016918


c1: EFTA00014650
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014650.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
The Silvio J. Mollo Building
One Saint Andrew's Plaza
New York, New York 10007
November 20, 2021
BY ELECTRONIC MAIL
Christian Everdell, Esq.
Cohen & Gresser LLP
800 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Laura Menninger, Esq.
Jeffrey Pagliuca, Esq.
Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C.
150 East Tenth Avenue
Denver, CO 80203
Bobbi Sternheim, Esq.
Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim
33 West 19th Street-4th Fl.
New York, NY 10007
Re:
United States V. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Dear Counsel:
Today the Government is producing additional materials, including Jencks Act and
Giglio material, regarding witnesses who may be called to testify at trial in the above-referenced
case. Enclosed please find an index detailing the materials included in today's production.
The Government is also producing today certain materials relating to individuals the
Government does not currently intend to call as witnesses at trial in the above-referenced case.
These materials do not contain a comprehensive set of Jencks Act and Giglio materials, as the
Government does not expect to call these individuals to testify at trial. Instead, these materials
contain, among other things, certain witness statements. Enclosed please find an index detailing
these materials. This production should not be taken to indicate that the Government believes it
has any obligation to provide all of these materials; rather, we make this production as a courtesy.
Moreover, although the Government presently does not intend to call the individuals listed in the
enclosed index, we reserve the right to do so and will notify you should the Government determine
that it intends to call any of these individuals at trial.
EFTA00014650

=== Page 2 ===
Page 2
Please note that this letter, the enclosed index, and the enclosed materials are governed
by the July 31, 2020 Protective Order in this case. In particular, the materials are designated
as "confidential" under the Protective Order. The index is itself designated as "confidential,"
because it includes information regarding records designated as "confidential" under the
Protective Order. The Department of Justice directed this office to cease the dissemination of
materials marked with the word "confidential" in order to avoid potential confusion with markings
reserved for classified documents. Accordingly, in order to note the appropriate designation of
this production under the operative Protective Order in this case, the materials being produced
today are marked with the following label: "SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17." This marking directly refers to the specific paragraphs
of the Protective Order that govern today's production.
Very truly yours,
DAMIAN WILLIAMS
United States Attorney
by:
Assistant United States Attorneys
EFTA00014651


c1: EFTA00015929
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015929.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To: Teri Gibbs
Cc:
)"
)"
Colleen Mullen
Subject: RE: CONFIDENTIAL: Victim Reports Against Jeffrey Epstein, 19 Cr. 490 (RMB)
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 15:13:29 +0000
Inline-Images: image001.jpg; image002.jpg
Hi Teri,
As I mentioned when I believe we first discussed this, the volume of materials is considerable, and our review is ongoing.
At this point, we don't have any affirmative information to provide, but we're happy to be in touch going forward.
Thanks,
From: Teri Gibbs
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 7:21 PM
To:
Cc:
is
;
Colleen Mullen
Subject: RE: CONFIDENTIAL: Victim Reports Against Jeffrey Epstein, 19 Cr. 490 (RMB)
H
I am following up regarding our August 5, 2019, email to confirm whether our clients are depicted in any of the
photographs seized from Jeffrey Epstein's home. I have attached three PDF files for your review which contain
pictures of our clients,
Please respond at your earliest convenience. Thank you.
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Best regards,
Teri Gibbs
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 3:52 PM Teri Gibbs
wrote:
Hi
:
Thank you for taking the time to speak with our firm on Friday, August 2, 2019, regarding our clients,
who believe they were assaulted by Epstein in or around June 2004.
We have confirmed our clients' availability for interviews with your office. Ms.
S available for an
in-person interview on August 26, 2019, or August 27, 2019. Ms.
who is located in
is available
,
for an interview via video conference, preferably the week of August 26th. Please confirm whether your office
is available to meet with Ms.
n those dates and whether we can arrange a video conference for Ms.
EFTA00015929

=== Page 2 ===
Additionally, as discussed in our call, we have attached two PDF files for your review which contain pictures
of Ms.
nd Ms.
om 2004. If possible, please confirm whether our clients are in any of the
photographs seized from Epstein's home.
Thank you. We look forward to hearing from you soon.
Best regards,
Teri Gibbs
Notice To Recipient: This e-mail is meant for only the intended recipient of the transmission, and may be a communication privileged by law. If you received this e-mail in
error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately of the error by return e-mail and please
delete this message and any and all duplicates of this message from your system. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this
communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or
(ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
Notice To Recipient: This e-mail is meant for only the intended recipient of the transmission, and may be a communication privileged by law. If you received this e-mail in
error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately of the error by return e-mail and please delete
this message and any and all duplicates of this message from your system. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
EFTA00015930

=== Page 3 ===
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: In order to comply with requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this
communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii)
promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
EFTA00015931


c1: EFTA00016788
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016788.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Exhibit B
EFTA00016788

=== Page 2 ===
IN THE MATTER OF AN OPINION
ON THE EXTRADITION LAW OF ENGLAND AND WALES
RE GHISLAINE MAXWELL
ADDENDUM OPINION
1.
This Addendum Opinion is provided in response to the Government's Memorandum
in Opposition to the Defendant's Renewed Motion to Release dated 16 December
2020, insofar as it pertains to matters of English extradition law and practice.
2.
The primary conclusions of the Opinion dated 8 October 2020 ('the Opinion')
remain unchanged, namely: (a) in the majority of cases, proceedings in England and
Wales in relation to US extradition requests are concluded in under two years; (b) it
is virtually certain that bail would be refused in an extradition case in circumstances
where the requested person had absconded from criminal proceedings in the United
States prior to trial and in breach of bail; and (c) on the basis of the information
currently known, it is highly unlikely that Ghislaine Maxwell would be able
successfully to resist extradition to the United States in relation to the charges in the
superseding indictment dated 7 July 2020. In addition to those conclusions, the
following three points may be made.
3.
First, as noted in the Opinion², Ms Maxwell's waiver of extradition would be
admissible in any extradition proceedings in England and Wales. While such a
document cannot compel a requested person to consent to their extradition once in
the United Kingdom, the document would be a highly relevant factor in any
contested extradition proceedings. In particular:
(a) If Ms Maxwell were to rely on such a waiver to secure bail in the United
States and then, having absconded, renege on the undertakings in that
1 The Government observes, at p.16 of the Motion, that this leaves open a "possibility" that extradition could be
resisted. Absolute certainty in any legal context is rare but the practical effect of the conclusion in the Opinion is
that, at this stage and on the basis of the information currently known, it is difficult to conceive of circumstances
in which Ms Maxwell could successfully resist extradition, and her extradition would be a virtual foregone
conclusion.
2 Opinion, para. 39.
EFTA00016789

=== Page 3 ===
document to seek to resist her extradition, bail would almost certainly be
refused for the duration of the extradition proceedings.
(b) The majority of the bars that might be relied upon by Ms Maxwell³ require
the extradition judge to make a finding that extradition would be
oppressive. Quite apart from the other factors rendering those bars
unavailable to Ms Maxwell, as set out in the Opinion, it is difficult to
conceive of circumstances in which a finding of oppression could be made
in relation to the serious charges faced by Ms Maxwell in circumstances
where she had absconded from the United States and was contesting her
extradition in breach of good faith undertakings relied upon to secure her
bail. Similar considerations apply to the balancing exercise required in
assessing whether extradition would breach the right to family life under
Article 8 of the ECHR. The remaining bars to extradition and human rights
bars are unlikely to be available to Ms Maxwell for the reasons given in
the Opinion4
(c) A breach of the undertakings in the waiver of extradition would be highly
likely to be viewed as a sign of bad faith and cause the extradition judge to
treat any evidence given by Ms Maxwell with scepticism.
4.
Second, it is not correct that section 93 of the Extradition Act 2003 ('the 2003 Act')
confers a general discretion on the Secretary of State to refuse extradition if a case is
sent to her by the extradition judge⁵. The ambit of the power in section 93 is
described at paragraph 8 of the Opinion. The Secretary of State may only refuse
extradition on the grounds provided for in that section, namely: (a) if an applicable
bar to extradition 6 is found to exist; (b) the Secretary of State is informed that the
request has been withdrawn⁷; (c) there is a competing claim for extradition from
3 Opinion, para. 26. Those bars are passage of time; forum; and mental and physical condition.
4 Opinion, paras. 27-29 and 36-37.
5
As appears to be submitted by the Government at p.19 of the Memorandum.
6 The bars to extradition that the Secretary of State must consider are: (a) the death penalty (s. 94); (b) speciality
(s. 95); (c) earlier extradition to the United Kingdom from another territory (s. 96); and (d) earlier transfer to the
United Kingdom from the International Criminal Court (s. 96A).
7 Extradition Act 2003, S. 93(4)(a).
EFTA00016790

=== Page 4 ===
another state; (d) the person has been granted asylum or humanitarian protection in
the United Kingdom9; or (e) extradition would be against the interests of UK
national security¹⁰. On the information currently known, none of these bars or
exceptions would arise in the case of Ms Maxwell.
5.
The exceptional nature of the Secretary of State's power is illustrated by the fact that
it has been exercised in the favour of a requested person on only one occasion since
the enactment of the 2003 Act, and that that single exercise of the power was based
on grounds on which reliance may not now be placed. 11
6.
Third, as to the timescales of extradition proceedings arising from requests for
extradition made by the Government of the United States, it is to be noted that the
purpose of the 2003 Act to streamline extradition procedures¹² and, in practice, the
legislation works to facilitate extradition. As noted in the Opinion¹³ the majority of
extradition cases conclude within two years, or three months in cases where consent
to extradition is given.
David Perry QC
6KBW College Hill
17 December 2020
8 Extradition Act 2003, SS. 93(4)(b), 126(2) and 179(2).
9 Extradition Act 2003, S. 93(4)(c) and (6A).
10 Extradition Act 2003, S. 208.
11 viz. in the case of Gary McKinnon, whose extradition was refused by the Secretary of State in 2012 on the
basis that he was seriously mentally ill and that there was a high risk of suicide were he to be extradited; since
that decision, the Secretary of State has been barred from refusing extradition on the basis of human rights
grounds: Extradition Act 2003, S. 70(11) (as inserted by the Crime and Courts Act 2013 with effect from 29 July
2013).
12 Welsh V United States [2007] 1 WLR 156 (Admin) para. 26.
13 Opinion, para. 13.
EFTA00016791


c1: EFTA00016759
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016759.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: Epstein/ Austria
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:35:37 +0000
Hi
- do you have a few minutes to chat about it? I am free until 2 and again from 330-430, or most of tomorrow.
Thanks,
From:
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2019 12:28 PM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
Subject: Epstein/ Austria
- The Austrian Embassy has just contacted me to ask whether they can be provided
information regarding the alleged Austrian passport that Epstein had in his possession. Is there
anything we can share in this regard? Thanks,
EFTA00016759


c1: EFTA00014154
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014154.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: Spencer Kuvin
To:
(USAFLS)"
Subject: RE: Work Release Notice -- Kuvin Clients.pdf
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 16:05:29 +0000
Importance: Normal
Thank you. Got it.
Spencer T. Kuvin
From:
(USAFLS) [mailto:
]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 11:01 AM
To: Spencer Kuvin
Subject: Work Release Notice -- Kuvin Clients.pdf
Dear Mr. Kuvin: As we discussed, I have attached a notification of Mr. Epstein's release. The notification
addresses both Ms.
and Ms.
in case the earlier e-mail to Mr. Leopold did not go through.
Thank you.
<<Work Release Notice - Kuvin Clients.pdf>>
Assistant U.S. Attorney
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Phone
Fax
EFTA00014154


c1: EFTA00016601
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016601.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
Subject: FW: RE: draft response to Epstein defense preservation requests
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 16:06:48 +0000
Attachments: 2019-08-05_JE_letter_to_defense_re_preservation_requests.ebddocx.docx
As you'll see, I've spent a fair bit of time on this because I presume it will be attached to whatever motion they end up
filing. My thoughts in track.
From:
)
Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 3:01 PM
To:
(USANYS)
is
(USANYS)
Cc:
is
)
Subject: RE: draft response to Epstein defense preservation requests
This has been in the works for a little while, due to various other things that have come up in the interim, but we didn't
want it to get lost given the discovery motion schedule. The attached is based on our conversations with
including
his email with suggested language for the prefatory language, and responds to the two attached defense letters. Happy to
discuss anytime and to incorporate comments and suggestions.
thanks,
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York
EFTA00016601


c1: EFTA00017041
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00017041.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: Fwd:
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 23:07:07 +0000
Begin forwarded message:
From:
Date: January 30, 2020 at 9:41:02 PM EST
To:
https://foxwilmington.com/headlines/prince-andrew-must-cooperate-in-jefrey-epstein-probe-give-up-
ghislaine-maxwell-royal-cousin-says/
EFTA00017041


c1: EFTA00014535
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014535.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To: "Martin G. Weinberg"
)"
)"
,
"Reid Weingarten"
, "Miller, Michael"
Subject: RE: US V Epstein
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 22:23:57 +0000
Received, thanks.
From: Martin G. Weinberg
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2019 15:36
To:
>;
)
>;
>; Reid Weingarten
>; 'Miller, Michael'
Cc:
Subject: US V Epstein
a more formal preservation/production request for NPA-related materials that have been the subject of our email
exchange up to now. If there are questions, let me know.
Thanks
Marty
Martin G. Weinberg, Esq.
This Electronic Message contains information from the Law Office
of Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee
only. If you are not the addressee, please note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents
of this message is prohibited.
EFTA00014535


c1: EFTA00014292
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014292.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: RE: Voucher for Trip 10643456-2 is late
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2019 13:50:11 +0000
Ok! Thank you.
Original Message
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2019 9:48 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Voucher for Trip 10643456-2 is late
Got it thanks - no need to contact eousa, I just wanted to make sure I hadn't forgotten to submit anything!
Thanks again.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 3, 2019, at 14:24,
wrote:
>
>
V
>
Good Morning! I just talked to
You have submitted the claim for reimbursement.
>
V
Nothing else you need to do. This is an automatically computer generated email. It is nothing we can do to stop
sending the auto emails.
>
V
I will address this issue to EOUSA if they can do something about it.
>
>
Thank you.
V
V
V
>
Original Message
> From:
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2019 5:50 AM
> To:
> Cc:
V
Subject: Re: Voucher for Trip 10643456-2 is late
V
>
I keep getting these emails. Do I need to submit anything else? Please advise - - thanks.
V
V
Sent from my iPhone
V
On Oct 1, 2019, at 05:03, "etravelservices@cwtsatotravel.com" <etravelservices@cwtsatotravel.com> wrote:
Dear
>> Your travel voucher for the trip below is now late based on your customer settings. Please submit your
voucher for this trip and mark it as Final if you have no additional expenses to claim.
EFTA00014292

=== Page 2 ===
Trip ID: 10643456-2
Traveler name:
Destination: Santa Monica
Purpose: R19NYS13842 - U.S. V. Epstein - Witness Interviews Trip
Dates: 2019-09-17 - 2019-09-20 Current status: Authorization Approved
E2 Single Sign On Login (within DOJ Network Only):
https://dojnet.doj.gov/jmd/fs/e2-redirect.html
E2 Manual Login (User ID and Password):
https://e2.gov.cwtsatotravel.com
Thank you for using E2Solutions. Help and support is available online by selecting the 'Online Help' link.
Please note: Replies to this mailbox are not monitored.
Some E2 email notifications are optional. To manage your email notifications, go to E2 Solutions to change
your email settings. Click 'Profile' on the task bar and then click the 'Edit Email Notifications' link to manage the
emails that you receive from us.
Reference ID# V0013
>>
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or proprietary information. If you received this
e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail and any attachments;
any further use of such e-mail or attachments is strictly prohibited.
EFTA00014293


c1: EFTA00016964
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016964.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
(NY) (FBI)"
Cc:
)"
)"
i
(NY) (FBI)"
Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant materials
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 03:33:23 +0000
I should generally be around tomorrow, so feel free to try me anytime, or if it's easier to pick a time just let me know
what's good for you. And happy to talk via phone, but if you have a list of the devices that you want to email, that's
totally fine too.
Thanks again and talk soon.
From:
(NY) (FBI)
Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2020 22:26
To:
Cc:
is
is
is
(NY) (FBI)
Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant materials
,
Was in Greece last week, have to look at some notes to make an accurate response. I'll give you a call tomorrow.
Any time best?
NY CART Coordinator
Senior Forensic Examiner
cell
desk
On Feb 9, 2020 9:23 PM,
)"
wrote:
We got a significant batch of search warrant returns from you a few weeks ago, around January 13, and we expect to get
access to it shortly but I don't think we know what's on it - that is, which devices specifically are in that batch. Could you
please let us know?
And then separately, I just got a hard drive this past week with another set of materials - could you let us know which
devices are on that one as well?
thanks very much,
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York
EFTA00016964


c1: EFTA00014243
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014243.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
SDNY News Clips
Monday, March 9, 2020
Contents
Public Corruption
2
Epstein
2
MCC
3
Money Laundering and Transnational Criminal Enterprises
5
Navarro
5
Terrorism and International Narcotics
10
Schulte
10
Violent and Organized Crime
13
Ray
13
Matters of Interest
16
Berman
16
Barr
18
Weinstein
19
Coronavirus
20
1
EFTA00014243

=== Page 2 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Public Corruption
Epstein
Prince Andrew 'shut the door' on Epstein probe cooperation: U.S. prosecutor
Reuters
By Brendan Pierson and Mark Hosenball
3/9/2020
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Britain's Prince Andrew has declined to cooperate with a U.S. investigation into possible co-
conspirators of deceased financier and accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, a U.S. prosecutor said on Monday.
"Contrary to Prince Andrew's very public offer to cooperate with our investigation into Epstein's co-conspirators, an
offer that was conveyed via press release, Prince Andrew has now completely shut the door on voluntary cooperation
and our office is considering its options," U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman said when asked about Epstein at a news
conference about an unrelated case.
Berman's spokesman James Margolin declined comment on the options being considered. He said the prince's lawyers
had said Andrew would not submit voluntarily to an interview. He said this was after Jan. 27, when Berman told a news
conference Andrew had not offered any cooperation.
Andrew, 60, had said in a public statement in November that he was stepping down from public duties and would be
willing to help "any appropriate law enforcement agency with their investigations, if required."
A friend of Epstein's, the prince has not been accused of criminal wrongdoing. He has described his association with the
financier as "ill-judged." A spokeswoman for the royal family declined comment.
Clare Montgomery, a senior London barrister who British news reports say represents Andrew on matters related to
Epstein, also declined to comment, citing professional rules limiting her ability to speak publicly about legal issues.
Andrew, Queen Elizabeth's second son, has denied an accusation by a woman who said she was trafficked by Epstein
and forced to have sex with his friends, including the prince, when she was 17.
A U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation probe is focusing on British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, a longtime associate of
Epstein's, and others who facilitated the wealthy financier's alleged trafficking of underage girls, law enforcement
sources told Reuters in December.
Epstein had socialized with the prince and other high-profile figures including U.S. President Donald Trump and former
president Bill Clinton.
Epstein's suicide in Manhattan's Metropolitan Correctional Center in August, at age 66, occurred little over a month
after he was arrested and charged with trafficking dozens of underage girls as young as 14 from at least 2002 to 2005.
Prosecutors said he recruited girls to give him massages, which became sexual in nature. Epstein had pleaded not guilty.
2
EFTA00014244

=== Page 3 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
MCC
Jail captain in charge when Jeffrey Epstein hanged himself to be transferred: sources
NY Daily News
By Stephen Rex Brown
3/9/2020
He's certainly no stranger to emergencies.
The Metropolitan Correctional Center captain in charge when Jeffrey Epstein hanged himself is expected to be
transferred to a new lockup where he will serve as "emergency preparedness officer," sources tell the Daily News.
Jermaine Darden's move to FCI Fort Dix, a low-security prison in Burlington County, N.J., was delayed due to the ongoing
lockdown at the dysfunctional jail in lower Manhattan, according to a source.
As captain, Darden oversees lieutenants and correctional officers at MCC. Among those under his command were
Officers Tova Noel and Michael Thomas, who are accused of sleeping on the job and falsifying records the night of
Epstein's death.
A source doubted that Darden was at the jail when Epstein was found hanging in his cell at 6:30 a.m. on Aug. 10 but was
confident he was one of the first people called about it.
Thomas' attorney Montell Figgins said Darden's transfer and new title was yet another example of the upper ranks of
the Metropolitan Correctional Center facing no consequences for systemic Bureau of Prisons failures that allowed the
accused sex trafficker to avoid facing justice.
"It shows you the hubris of the system," Figgins said. "They couldn't care less about the reality of what they're dong.
They would take this person, who was involved in this incident, and give him another title?"
Darden, 48, declined to comment.
The transfer follows a pattern similar to that of Lamine N'Diaye, the correctional center warden during the Epstein
debacle. N'Diaye was moved to a desk job at a regional office in Pennsylvania days after the suicide. He was expected to
assume a leadership role at Fort Dix in February until U.S. Attorney General William Barr intervened and ordered the
transfer be put on hold while investigations into Epstein's death continue, The Associated Press reported.
Darden's new title at Fort Dix could come with a pay raise, a source said.
Working at the low-security lockup in New Jersey should be less stressful than at the Metropolitan Correctional Center.
The 12-story jail next door to Manhattan Federal Court has been reeling since Epstein's suicide. The building's
infrastructure is crumbling. Morale is at rock bottom following the arrests of Thomas and Noel. A gun smuggled into the
jail prompted an ongoing lockdown and forced overworked staff to put in even longer hours. The FBI is investigating the
flow of contraband into the facility.
3
EFTA00014245

=== Page 4 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
A gun smuggled into the jail prompted an ongoing lockdown and forced overworked staff to put in even longer hours.
The FBI is investigating the flow of contraband into the facility.
Figgins made the case that Darden's leadership was one of many problems at the Metropolitan Correctional Center at
the time of Epstein's suicide.
"They don't have any pictures of what happened that night because they didn't follow proper protocol," Figgins said.
"And yet he gets another position."
The Bureau of Prisons declined to comment on personnel decisions.
Thomas and Noel have pleaded not guilty to charges including filing false records, which carries a maximum sentence of
five years.
4
EFTA00014246

=== Page 5 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Money Laundering and Transnational Criminal Enterprises
Navarro
Horse racing trainers and veterinarians charged in international doping scandal
NBC
By Tom Winter and David K. Li
3/9/2020
More than two dozen trainers, veterinarians and others in horse racing were charged in a widespread doping scheme
that "amounted to nothing less than abuse," federal officials and court papers revealed Monday.
The defendants ran horses at tracks in New York, New Jersey, Florida, Ohio, Kentucky and the United Arab Emirates,
federal prosecutors in New York City said.
"Over the course of the scheme, participants manufactured, purchased, sold, shipped, delivered, received and
administered thousands of units" of performance-enhancing drugs, or PEDs, for use on racehorses, U.S. Attorney
Geoffrey Berman wrote in charging documents against 19 of 27 defendants.
The indicted included 11 trainers, seven veterinarians and nine drug suppliers and distributors, according to Berman.
"All involved in the cruel and systematic doping of racehorses across the United States and indeed around the world
using misbranded, adulated and dangerous performance-enhancing drugs," Berman told reporters in New York.
"This is the most far-reaching prosecution of racehorse doping in the history of the Department of Justice."
William F. Sweeney Jr., the FBI's assistant director in charge of the New York office, said this practice forced horses to
run faster than they really could, putting them in grave danger.
"These substances stimulated endurance, deadened nerves, increased oxygen intake and reduced inflammation,"
Sweeney told reporters. "What actually happened to these horses amounted to nothing less than abuse."
He added: "They experienced cardiac issues, overexertion leading to leg fractures, increased risk of injury and in some
cases death."
As of now, investigators said they have not found any evidence that defendants told anyone about their doping scheme
so to make bets on juiced horses. But they allegedly profited on hefty prize money.
"Conversely, the human beings in the scheme continued to line their purses as they manipulated this multiple-billion-
dollar horse racing industry across the globe," Sweeney said. "People are rightfully disturbed by the mistreatment of
animals who have absolutely no means of defense."
Prosecutors said trainer Jorge Navarro "orchestrated" this scheme by "using PEDs designed to evade drug tests,
physically concealing containers of PEDs and drug paraphernalia from state regulators and racing officials."
5
EFTA00014247

=== Page 6 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
One of Navarro's most prized thoroughbreds, XY Jet, died of an apparent heart attack this year after receiving a
significant amount of PEDs, in one instance 50 injections, according to the indictment.
X Y Jet won the prestigious Dubai Golden Shaheen at Meydan Racecourse in Dubai in March 2019, which paid $1.5
million to the winner, highlighting a career of 12 victories and more than $3 million in earnings. The horse won that race
and another contest in February of last year in Florida after receiving adulterated and misbranded PEDs before both
races, according to the indictment.
While in the UAE for the Dubai race, Navarro "personally administered various adulterated and misbranded PEDs to X Y
Jet, including a substance Navarro referred to as 'monkey,'' according to the indictment.
"Monkey" is a commonly used code word for a drug that can "boost a racehorse's red blood cell count in order to
stimulate endurance during a race and improve race recover," according to the indictment.
But those drugs, "when combined with intense physical exertion, thicken the horse's blood, thereby causing increased
cardiac exertion and pressure, which can lead to cardiac issues or death," the indictment said.
Navarro and another high profile trainer, Jason Servis, were both indicted on a count of conspiracy of drug adulteration
and misbranding.
Navarro allegedly told Servis in an intercepted phone call on March 5 last year that he particularly liked a PED called SGF-
1000.
"I've been using it on everything almost," Navarro told Servis. Navarro ended the phone call a short time later, saying, "I
don't want to talk about this S--- on the phone, OK," according to prosecutors.
Servis is the trainer of Maximum Security, who crossed the finish line first at last year's Kentucky Derby but was
disqualified minutes later after stewards ruled that the horse had impeded the paths of others; Country House was
declared the winner. Maximum Security won the Eclipse Award as horse racing's top 3-year-old colt in 2019.
Before a race later that year at Monmouth Park in Oceanport, New Jersey, Servis was caught on an intercepted
telephone call with veterinarian and co-defendant Kristian Rhein, according to the indictment. The veterinarian assured
Servis that a PED given to Maximum Security wouldn't show up on a test.
"They don't even have a test for it," Rhein told Servis, the indictment alleged. "There's no test for it in America."
Federal agents specializing in organize crime probes were investigating a "different case, on a different topic all
together" before they tripped on to the doping scheme and "one thing led to another," according to Sweeney.
"We had one agent in particular (who) was actually an expert in this industry from (a) prior life," Sweeney said. "He was
part of the team and they did great work."
The indictments show how widespread illegal drugs are in horse racing, according to People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals.
6
EFTA00014248

=== Page 7 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
"This sweeping federal investigation has exposed that illegal doping is still ubiquitous in horse racing, including at the
highest levels," PETA Senior Vice President Kathy Guillermo said in a statement.
"These crimes cheat bettors of billions of dollars and are egregiously cruel to horses, resulting in rampant injuries, pain,
and deaths, such as those cited in the indictment."
7
EFTA00014249

=== Page 8 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Maximum Security trainer among 27 indicted in racehorse doping scheme
NY Post
By Gabrielle Fonrouge
3/9/2020
The trainer behind the world's best racehorse, Maximum Security, along with 26 others have been indicted in the largest
crackdown on racehorse doping the Department of Justice has ever seen, Manhattan federal prosecutors announced
Monday.
Jason Servis, who just led Maximum Security to a $10 million victory in last month's Saudi Cup, allegedly used everything
from customized painkillers to blood thickeners on "virtually all of the racehorses under his control" to make them
"unnaturally fast," prosecutors alleged.
"These defendants engaged in this conduct not for the love of the sport, and certainly not out of concern for the horses,
but for money," US Attorney for the Southern District of New York Geoffrey Berman said Monday. "And it was the
racehorses that paid the price for the defendants' unbridled greed."
Prosecutors alleged the international scheme spanned racetracks in New York, New Jersey, Florida, Ohio, Kentucky and
the United Arab Emirates and could have killed a number of horses.
"You know how many [expletive] horses he [Navarro] [expletive] killed and broke down that I made disappear? You
know how much trouble he could get in if they found out the six horses we killed?" Nicholas Surick, one of the
indicted trainers, wrote in a text message about co-conspirator Jorge Navarro, another high-profile horse trainer.
One of Navarro's award-winning steeds, XY Jet, died of an apparent heart attack in January after receiving over 50
injections of performance-enhancing drugs, an indictment against Navarro alleges.
Berman said X Y Jet's death is still under investigation.
The probe, started two years ago by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, turned up a total of nine trainers, nine
suppliers and seven crooked veterinarians who used blood thickeners, painkillers and bronchodilators to dope the
horses.
"These substances stimulated endurance, deadened nerves, increased oxygen intake and reduced inflammation,"
William Sweeney, assistant director in charge of the FBI's New York office, said at a press conference.
"What actually happened to these horses amounted to nothing less than abuse."
Sweeney said the PEDs caused the horses to have "cardiac issues" and led to "overexertion," which can cause leg
fractures and death.
One of the indicted veterinarians, Dr. Louis Grasso, who'd previously been investigated for a racehorse doping scheme,
allegedly distributed "cobra venom" to trainers as a painkiller and filled out prescriptions under the names of canine
patients to keep investigators off his tail, according to court records and Paulick Report.
"I don't give a f-k what it is," Grasso allegedly told co-conspirator and fellow racehorse trainer Thomas Guido III when
saying he charges "$100 per script," according to an indictment against him.
Grasso then allegedly boasted to an undercover officer that he could get "a script for anything," records show.
Investigators alleged Grasso submitted false prescriptions to over 10 pharmacies in at least seven states in 2019 alone
and was caught counseling Guido after one of his horses died, the indictment states.
8
EFTA00014250

=== Page 9 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
"It happens [the trainer] probably over juiced him," Grasso allegedly said. "I've seen that happen 20 times."
A total of 26 out of the 27 defendants were arrested Monday while another defendant, Seth Fishman, was previously
arrested in October. Servis got hit with a charge of misbranding conspiracy, which relates to mislabeling drugs.
They collectively face a total of 105 years in prison, prosecutors said.
9
EFTA00014251

=== Page 10 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Terrorism and International Narcotics
Schulte
Trial of Programmer Accused in C.I.A. Leak Ends in Hung Jury
NYT
By Nicole Hong
3/9/2020
An office of the Central Intelligence Agency outside Washington turned into a crime scene on March 7, 2017.
WikiLeaks had just published a trove of confidential C.I.A. documents that revealed secret methods the spy agency used
to penetrate the computer networks of foreign governments and terrorists.
Investigators scrambled to find the culprit, seizing more than 1,000 devices from the C.I.A. as top-secret operations and
computer networks shut down. Eventually, they arrested Joshua Schulte, 31, who worked as a computer engineer for
the agency.
But on Monday, in a muddled outcome for the government, a federal jury in Manhattan could not agree on whether to
convict Mr. Schulte of the biggest theft of classified documents in C.I.A. history.
After hearing four weeks of testimony, the jurors deadlocked on eight counts, including illegal gathering and
transmission of national defense information. They did convict Mr. Schulte on two other counts - contempt of court
and making false statements to the F.B.I.
The motivation for the alleged theft, prosecutors said, was Mr. Schulte's belief that C.I.A. management did not take his
workplace complaints seriously. His feuding with co-workers led to his resignation in November 2016 to join Bloomberg
L.P. as a software engineer.
The partial verdict came after six days of chaotic deliberations. One juror was dismissed in the middle of the discussions
because she violated the judge's orders by researching the case, and then shared that information with the jury. The
judge declined to replace her with an alternate, leaving a panel of 11 people.
The jury also complained in a note about a separate juror who was not participating in the group discussion, raising
concerns about "her attitude."
After the verdict, one juror said the deliberations were a "horrible experience," her eyes welling with tears as she
walked away from reporters.
Mr. Schulte's legal troubles are not over. The government could retry the case. In addition, during the investigation,
federal agents found more than 10,000 images and videos of child pornography on electronic devices in Mr. Schulte's
home. He faces a separate federal trial on those charges.
The verdict showed that the jury had doubts about the government's most important evidence, which came from a
C.I.A. server. Trial witnesses guided jurors through a complicated maze of forensic analysis that, according to
prosecutors, showed Mr. Schulte's work machine accessing an old backup file one evening in April 2016.
10
EFTA00014252

=== Page 11 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
He did so, prosecutors said, by reinstating his administrator-level access that the C.I.A. had removed after his workplace
disputes. The file matched the documents posted by WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization, nearly a year later,
according to the government.
The defense argued that the C.I.A. computer network had weak passwords and widely known security vulnerabilities,
and that it was possible other C.I.A. employees or foreign adversaries had breached the system.
Mr. Schulte's lawyers pointed to an internal C.I.A. report commissioned after the WikiLeaks debacle that found the
agency did not know the files had been stolen until a year later.
In particular, the defense zeroed in on a C.I.A. employee identified only as Michael. On the night of the alleged theft,
Michael and Mr. Schulte, who were close friends, left the office together, according to a government court filing.
The C.I.A. placed Michael on administrative leave in August because he was not cooperating with the criminal
investigation into the data theft and had declined to take a polygraph test.
But the government did not notify the defense about Michael's employment status until six months later, the night
before he took the stand at trial as a government witness.
Mr. Schulte's lawyer, Sabrina Shroff, asked in her closing argument why prosecutors had "kept this information about
Michael to themselves."
"It shows their doubt about the case against Mr. Schulte," she told jurors.
During deliberations, some of the notes sent by the jury signaled it was exploring alternate culprits who might have
committed the theft.
The government had no direct proof that Mr. Schulte sent the files to WikiLeaks. Instead, prosecutors relied on
circumstantial evidence. For instance, Mr. Schulte downloaded the same program onto his home computer that
WikiLeaks recommends as a safe way to submit documents to the organization.
Prosecutors said that after stealing the documents and sending them to WikiLeaks, Mr. Schulte "nuked" his hard drive at
home to erase any trace of his submission.
The trial provided a rare glimpse inside the top-secret cyberoperations of the C.I.A. Mr. Schulte was a coder in the
agency's Engineering Development Group, which builds tools that allow C.I.A. officers to extract files from foreign
computers without detection.
On the witness stand, C.I.A. employees - who testified under pseudonyms or only first names - publicly
acknowledged for the first time some of the hacking tools that had been developed by the agency.
"Foreign governments do not want us on their networks and would complain, to put it lightly, if they caught us doing
this," testified a C.I.A. employee, who used the pseudonym Jeremy Weber.
11
EFTA00014253

=== Page 12 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Prosecutors were careful to avoid details about specific operations. During cross-examination, Ms. Shroff asked one
C.I.A. witness: "Do you recall a time when the C.I.A. covertly tried to read Angela Merkel's emails?" referring to the
German chancellor.
The government objected, and the judge stopped the witness from answering.
The testimony revealed the scramble inside C.I.A. headquarters when the files leaked. Sean Roche, a top C.I.A. official at
the time, said he got a call from another C.I.A. director who was out of breath. "It was the equivalent of a digital Pearl
Harbor," he testified.
Mr. Schulte immediately became a suspect. His personnel file indicated a willingness to violate C.I.A. policy, and his
resignation letter accused the agency of "deep injustices and illegal behavior," witnesses testified.
Much of the trial felt like a rehash of a workplace complaint gone horribly wrong. Mr. Schulte's primary grievance was
with another co-worker, identified only as Amol. Their group at the C.I.A., predominantly male coders, was known for
shooting Nerf guns and playing pranks.
Days after the first WikiLeaks disclosure, Mr. Schulte was scheduled to fly to Mexico.
Federal agents approached Mr. Schulte as he was leaving work at Bloomberg and took him to a cafe near Grand Central
Terminal in New York. Mr. Schulte gave them advice about finding the leaker. His hands trembled during the
conversation, an F.BI. agent testified.
That night, Mr. Schulte stayed in a hotel room as F.B.I. agents, who had a search warrant, seized large volumes of data
from his apartment.
The defense argued that investigators were quick to scapegoat Mr. Schulte because he was an easy target; after all, he
had antagonized virtually all of his co-workers at the C.I.A.
Prosecutors showed jurors detailed notebooks that Mr. Schulte kept in jail while awaiting trial. His bail was revoked after
he used the internet without the judge's permission, in violation of court orders.
While in jail, Mr. Schulte obtained a contraband cellphone from another inmate and set up a Twitter account called
@freejasonbourne, referring to the fictional C.I.A. operative played by the actor Matt Damon. He emailed reporters
sensitive information about his case from an encrypted account, resulting in his conviction for contempt of court.
In one notebook, prosecutors showed Mr. Schulte wrote a to-do list for himself, including "delete suspicious emails."
12
EFTA00014254

=== Page 13 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Violent and Organized Crime
Ray
Lawrence Ray Is the Latest Defendant To Be Convicted Before He Goes to Trial
Frank Report
By K.R. Claviger
3/8/2020
To some extent, it's always been this way: prosecutors like to get as much media coverage as possible when they
announce arrests and indictments - especially if the defendant is well known or the alleged crime is especially
abhorrent.
But with the advent of 24/7 news and the spread of social media, the reality is that many cases are now being
adjudicated in the court of public opinion long before they show up in the court of law.
Lawrence Ray - the man who allegedly forced at least one of his daughter's friends from Sarah Lawrence College into
prostitution - is the latest example of this rapidly increasing phenomenon.
According to Geoffrey Berman, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), Ray was arrested on
February 10th at his home in Piscataway, NJ - and charged with sex trafficking, forced labor, and extortion.
At the time of his arrest, Ray was in bed with one of his daughter's former college roommates - a woman for whom he
had been named guardian (I plan to do more research on that situation).
According to Berman, Ray had groomed the woman to be a prostitute - and had kept most of the money she earned
from her trysts.
Alleged Prostitute's Earnings Are Extraordinary
At Ray's arraignment on February 11th, Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon described ledgers that were confiscated
from Ray's home at the time of his arrest.
According to Sassoon, those ledgers indicated that Ray's alleged victim generated $700,000 in earnings in 2017 - and
$1,000,000 in 2018.
Let's just take a look at those numbers to see if they make any sense.
If the alleged victim was charging an average of $500 per hookup, that would mean that she had 1,400 hookups in 2017
- and 2,000 hookups in 2018.
That's somewhere between 27 and 39 per week - or between 4 and 5 per day - with no days off.
And even if the alleged victim was somehow able to charge an average of $1,000 per hookup - which seems somewhat
unlikely - that would mean she had more than 900 hookups in 2017 and at least 1,000 in 2018.
13
EFTA00014255

=== Page 14 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
While all of the cited figures are mathematically and physically possible, they nevertheless seem extraordinary and
almost unimaginable.
And should they prove to be true, they will likely cause a lot of coeds at Sarah Lawrence College and elsewhere to
reconsider their career options.
The Whole Story Is Somewhat Unimaginable
According to prosecutors, the exploitation began in 2010 when Ray moved into an on-campus dorm with his daughter
and several of her sophomore classmates at the college.
As outlined in his indictment, "Ray began 'therapy' sessions with some roommates purportedly to help them with their
psychological problems, and presented himself as a father figure to the roommates".
The indictment further alleges that Ray spent almost a decade physically, psychologically and sexually abusing his
victims.
Some of his alleged victims were required to perform unpaid labor at Ray's behest - while others were forced to drain
money from their personal bank accounts and those of their parents.
Prosecutors indicated that the alleged crimes involved as many as five victims - and that they took place in Westchester
County, Manhattan, and North Carolina.
Ray has been charged with a total of nine felony counts - and could be facing more than 100 years in federal prison if he
were to be found guilty of all of them.
Allegations First Emerged in 2019
Adding to the story's unbelievability is the fact that in April 2019, New York magazine published a story that included
many of the same accusations that are set forth in the indictment.
According to a statement that was released by Sarah Lawrence College at the time of Ray's arrest, it undertook an
"internal investigation" of the specific activities that were described in the New York magazine article but did not
substantiate any of those claims.
In that same statement, the college indicated that "We have not been contacted by the Southern District of New York,
but will, of course, cooperate in their investigation to the full extent of the law if invited to do so".
Why the SDNY investigators would not have discussed the matter with college officials is just one of the many mysteries
surrounding this case.
This May Be Another Case Where the Results Are OK but Not the Process
Maybe Lawrence Ray is a total scumbag who deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison.
14
EFTA00014256

=== Page 15 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
But the way in which this case has been handled thus far - with the salacious claims made by the U.D. Attorney for the
SDNY at the press conference it held to announce Ray's arrest and the subsequent leaks to the media concerning the
materials that were seized at Ray's home - it's starting to look a lot like the script that's been followed in other recent
high-profile prosecutions.
What the hell has happened to due process - and the presumption of innocence before someone is found guilty?
Why do prosecutors feel it's necessary to try their cases in the court of public opinion before they go to trial?
How is it possible to select objective jurors who have not formed an opinion about cases like this when everyone who
watches TV and/or who has an internet connection is bombarded for months with news about the case before it goes to
trial?
Have we reached a point where trials are no longer necessary - and we're ready to just let prosecutors decide who's
guilty of committing a crime?
Is this really what the founders of America had in mind when they were drafting the U.S. Constitution?
15
EFTA00014257

=== Page 16 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Matters of Interest
Berman
US Attorney Geoffrey Berman asserts independence from Justice Department
CNN
By Kara Scannell
3/9/2020
(CNN) - Geoffrey Berman, the US attorney in Manhattan, asserted his office's independence from politics on Monday in
his first public comments since career prosecutors have clashed with Justice Department leadership over the handling of
politically sensitive cases.
Berman's rare remarks follow actions taken by Attorney General William Barr, from his characterization of former
special counsel Robert Mueller's investigative conclusions to the sentencing of Trump ally Roger Stone, that have raised
concerns among current and former prosecutors that Barr is doing the bidding of the President and politicizing the
Justice Department.
Berman, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, was asked by a reporter at a press conference whether the
Justice Department had interfered in his office's investigation of Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two associates of Rudy
Giuliani, Trump's personal attorney.
Parnas and Fruman, who were charged with campaign finance violations, worked with Giuliani in his effort to dig up dirt
on former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter's activities in Ukraine. Prosecutors are also investigating Giuliani's
efforts in Ukraine, including his attempt to remove then-US ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.
"The Southern District of New York has a long history of integrity and pursuing cases and declining to pursue cases based
only on the facts and the law and the equities, without regard to partisan political concerns. My primary commitment is
and has been to maintain those core values and that's how our office is operating," Berman said.
Berman's statement is the first time he has spoken out about the independence of the US Attorney's Office for the
Southern District of New York, which has had a long history of operating apart from the Justice Department and often
handles high-profile cases.
Since Barr became attorney general last year, there has been tension between him and Berman. Barr has attempted to a
micromanage certain cases by asking more questions than his predecessors, according to people familiar with the
relationship. Berman has pushed back, these people say, and recently moved to indict a Turkish bank over Barr's efforts
to reach a settlement that would have avoided an indictment.
Barr clashed with federal prosecutors in recent weeks over the handling of two high-profile cases that touch the
President, the sentencing of Stone and the oversight of the prosecution of Michael Flynn, Trump's former national
security adviser. Barr assigned the US attorney from St. Louis with re-examining the Flynn investigation, among others.
He also created a new framework for investigations relating to Ukraine with the appointment of the US attorney in
Brooklyn to coordinate any existing investigations and approve the "widening and expansion of existing matters,"
according to an internal Justice Department memorandum.
16
EFTA00014258

=== Page 17 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
That move was perceived by some former prosecutors as an attempt to assert more control over investigations tied to
Ukraine, especially those carried out by the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. In addition to the
Giuliani investigation, prosecutors are also looking into whether foreign money flowed into Trump's inaugural
committee. The office also prosecuted Michael Cohen, Trump's former personal attorney, for violating campaign finance
laws in connection to payments made to two women who alleged affairs with Trump.
17
EFTA00014259

=== Page 18 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Barr
Judge's blistering opinion reveals William Barr's unfitness
CNN
By Elie Honig
3/9/2020
(CNN) - As a Justice Department prosecutor, I was taught that all you have is your credibility and your independence.
Without those two attributes, you're lost. But in a scalding opinion, federal District Court Judge Reggie Walton called
into serious doubt whether Attorney General William Barr possesses either of these golden prosecutorial virtues (and
before anyone cries politics, Judge Walton was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush, a Republican, in
2001).
Judge Walton's opinion pulls no punches. He finds that "the Court cannot reconcile certain public representations made
by Attorney General Barr with the findings in the Mueller Report." (Judge Walton is hardly alone in this assessment;
Mueller himself castigated Barr for "not fully captur[ing] the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and
conclusions.") The judge notes Barr's "lack of candor" which "call[s] into question Attorney General Barr's credibility and
in turn, the Department's representation" that it had properly redacted the Mueller report in the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit before the Court.
The Justice Department released a statement taking issue with the judge's ruling, noting that its attorneys worked with
Mueller's team to redact the report. But it completely misses the point. Judge Walton criticizes Barr not for the
redactions made to the Mueller report, but rather for Barr's misleading public comments about it. The Justice
Department is silent on this issue.
Having already trashed Barr's credibility, Judge Walton then turned his fire on Barr's lack of political independence,
noting that Barr's public "inconsistencies" with the Mueller report -- at a time when the public did not have access to the
report itself -- "cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to
influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump..."
For a former Justice Department prosecutor like myself, this is a jaw-dropper. Not only does a Republican-nominated
federal judge call out Barr for fudging the truth, but he further questions whether Barr did it to protect the President --
precisely the opposite of what the Justice Department is, and should be, about.
Judge Walton's scathing decision has led to a humiliating result not just for Barr but for the entire Justice Department. In
a FOIA lawsuit, a judge typically defers heavily to the Department to make necessary and appropriate redactions to any
materials before they are released to the public. Here, however, Judge Walton has essentially said: I don't trust you to
do this honestly, so I'll have to babysit you and review your work first. (Fool me once...)
A ruling like Judge Walton's would derail the career of any line-level prosecutor. In my 14 years as a federal and state
prosecutor, neither I nor any of my hundreds of colleagues were ever called out anywhere near so bluntly and forcefully
by a judge. Judge Walton's powerful words confirm what thousands of former Justice Department prosecutors and
officials (including me) already firmly believe: Barr is unfit to serve as Attorney General.
18
EFTA00014260

=== Page 19 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Weinstein
Harvey Weinstein injured in Rikers Island jail, his publicist says
CNN
By Chloe Melas and Ralph Ellis
3/9/2020
(CNN) - Convicted rapist Harvey Weinstein fell sometime Sunday morning while at Rikers Island jail, his spokesperson
Juda Englemayer told CNN.
Englemayer said Weinstein was dizzy before he fell.
"Harvey says his head throbs all the time and thinks he has a concussion. He has not been officially diagnosed,"
Englemayer said.
Englemayer, who spoke to Weinstein by phone Sunday evening, says Weinstein has "had a lot of time to think about his
life and what he's done," adding, "He said he wasn't a nice guy and that's how he got here."
Movie mogul Weinstein doesn't walk steadily and doesn't have a walker in jail, Englemayer said. During his recent trial,
Weinstein used a walker to get in and out of court.
After Weinstein was convicted of sex crimes February 24, paramedics determined he had a heart issue and transported
him to Bellevue Hospital in Manhattan.
Weinstein, 67, had a heart procedure last Wednesday during which doctors inserted a stent, Engelmayer told CNN
recently. He was moved Thursday to the infirmary unit at Rikers Island, New York's main jail complex, Engelmayer said.
He's expected to be sentenced March 11 in New York State Supreme Court. He faces a minimum of five years and a
maximum of more than two decades in prison.
A New York jury convicted Weinstein of committing a criminal sex act in the first degree involving one woman and
another count of rape in the third degree.
19
EFTA00014261

=== Page 20 ===
SDNY News Clips, Monday, March 9, 2020
Coronavirus
SDNY Courthouses Ban Entry To Any Exposed To Coronavirus
Law360
By Frank G. Runyeon
3/9/2020
Law360, New York (March 9, 2020, 11:10 AM EDT) -- The Southern District of New York on Monday enacted new
restrictions on who may enter the courts due to the coronavirus outbreak, barring entry to anyone who recently
traveled to countries that are hardest hit by the virus or those who have come into contact with it.
In an order, Chief Judge Colleen McMahon said the ban applies to anyone who has traveled to China, South Korea,
Japan, Italy or Iran in the past 14 days. Also banned are people who live with or have come into close contact with
anyone who has been in one of those countries during that period; people who have been asked to self-quarantine; and
those who have either been diagnosed with the virus - called COVID-19 - or come into contact with someone who has
been diagnosed.
The order cited guidance by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control that the best way to avoid illness is by avoiding the
virus altogether.
"Anyone attempting to enter in violation of these protocols will be denied entry by a court security officer," Judge
McMahon wrote. She added that the restrictions would "remain in place temporarily until it is determined to be safe to
remove them."
20
EFTA00014262


c1: EFTA00017090
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00017090.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Jeffrey and Ghislaine have been together, a couple, for the last 11 years.
They are, contrary to what many people think, rarely apart - I almost always
see them together
Ghislaine is highly intelligent, and great company with a ready smile and an
infectious laugh who always puts one at ones ease, and always makes one
feel welcome.
Jeffrey and Ghislaine share many mutual interests and they have a lot of fun
together. They both have keen searching and inquisitive minds. She grew
up amongst scientists and in an academic and business environment.
They share a love of travel and art. She speaks 5 languages. She enjoys
spending time visiting auction houses (she says that is the best way to learn
about art and antiques - your expected to look touch and ask questions)
Ghislaine also has her own interests and has her own business pursuits - she
is independent and strong willed - something which Jeffrey loves about her -
She is adventurous - she flies helicopters, she is athletic - she rides horses,
plays tennis, skis and scuba dives. She is a serious photographer (she always
has a camera in hand) who is collaborating with some of the leading people
involved at the cutting edge of digital photography.
Jeffrey and Ghislaine compliment each other really well and I cannot
imagine one without the other. On top of being great partners they are also
the best of friends.
EFTA00017090


c1: EFTA00016177
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016177.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: FW: Prince Andrew
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2020 14:42:10 +0000
FYI
From:
Sent: Friday, July 3, 2020 5:24 AM
To:
Subject: Fwd: Prince Andrew
I'll probably get a complete round up of the U.K. news a little later. I think it more than a little weird that
reached out again right before this arrest. (I don't have
email on this system, so please forward
to him and others.)
Hope you have a a great 4th of July. I'll be back on EDT starting Tuesday morning.
Best,
US DOJ Attaché - London
From:
Sent: Friday, July 3, 2020 7:12:26 AM
Subject: Prince Andrew
The Daily Mirror, Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, Daily Mail, Metro, and Daily Express all lead with articles on the
arrest of Ghislaine Maxwell and the implications of this case for Prince Andrew. i and FT have smaller stories.
Daily Mail:
Prince Andrew is 'bewildered' over lack of response from US justice officials as he and Royal Family brace for
new revelations after arrest of Jeffrey Epstein 'pimp' Maxwell
Ghislaine Maxwell, 58, arrested in US for allegedly helping to lure underage girls
Girls were allegedly abused by paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who died last August
Arrest will now intensify calls for Andrew to be questioned over any involvement
Andrew has previously claimed he has offered three times to be a witness in case
But US prosecutors say he has declined their request to schedule an interview
Full story:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8483875/Prince-Andrews-six-month-standoff-FBl-deepens.html
Best,
EFTA00016177

=== Page 2 ===
EFTA00016178


c1: EFTA00015062
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015062.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 11:53 AM
Subject:
To:
spenet time with daddy,, great fun
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
Jeffrey Epstein
EFTA00015062

=== Page 2 ===
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments.
Tel:
EFTA00015063


c1: EFTA00014185
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014185.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM
Document 34
Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2008
Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
NO. 08-80119-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON
JANE DOE NO. 2,
Plaintiff,
V.
JEFFREY EPSTEIN,
Defendant.
/
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendant Jeffrey Epstein's Motion to File
Under Seal, filed July 28, 2008. Defendant seeks to file his reply to his Motion to Stay under
seal.¹ The Court has carefully considered the motion and the record and is otherwise fully
advised in the premises.
As the Court has previously explained to the parties, the Local Rules for the Southern
District of Florida state that "proceedings in the United States District Court are public and Court
filings are matters of public record." S.D. Fla. L.R. 5.4(A). It is well settled that the media and
the public in general possess a common-law right to inspect and copy judicial records. See Nixon
V. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978). "The right to inspect and copy
records is not absolute, however. As with other forms of access, it may interfere with the
administration of justice and hence may have to be curtailed." Newman V. Graddick, 696 F.2d
The parties are reminded that all documents filed conventionally (including those filed
under seal) must be filed with the Clerk's Office in West Palm Beach, Florida.
1
EFTA00014185

=== Page 2 ===
Case 9:08-cv-80119-KAM Document 34 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2008 Page 2 of 2
796, 803 (11th Cir. 1983). This right of access creates a presumption in favor of openness of court
records, which "must be balanced against any competing interest advanced." United States V.
Noriega, 752 F. Supp. 1037, 1040 (S.D. 1990). For example, courts may look to see whether
the records sought are for illegitimate purposes. Newman, 696 F.2d at 803. Likewise, the Court
may consider whether "the press has already been permitted substantial access to the contents of
the records." Id.
In his motion to seal, Defendant states that he seeks to file this document under seal "to
comply with the confidentiality clause" in the agreement between Defendant and the U.S.
Attorney cited in his brief. (Def. Mot. 2.) The Court is familiar with the U.S. Attorney's
objections to unsealing any part of the agreement, see In re: Jane Doe, No. 08-80736-CIV (S.D.
Fla. July 11, 2008). However, as the Court has previously held, the U.S. Attorney's objections
do not outweigh the public interest in having access to court records. Further, the details of the
agreement contained in Defendant's Reply brief have, in large part, already been unsealed and
released to the public. The Court finds no justification to keep these documents under seal.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion to File
Under Seal is DENIED. The Clerk shall UNSEAL docket entries 29 and 30 and make them
available for public inspection through CM/ECF at the earliest possible time.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County,
Florida, this 4th day of August, 2008.
Kn
KENNETH A. MARRA
United States District Judge
Copies furnished to: all counsel of record
2
EFTA00014186


c1: EFTA00014622
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014622.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: Daniel Rose
To:
Cc:
Subject: Re:
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 18:49:06 +0000
I'll follow up but the harassment is getting worse
She is getting text messages and the like from reporters still which she ignores
The only concerning thing I have was today someone sent her a video of Jeffrey Epstein to her YouTube account.
She didn't know she had one until she got a notice about it.
I don't know what can be done to get these reporters and media people to stop as they seem to not understand the
answer "no"
This email was sent via my iPhone using the dictation app. Please understand there may be some
typographical or grammatical errors.
Daniel J. Rose, P.A.
)
NOTICE: This E-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy
Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential and may be ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL.
It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named as recipient. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify sender immediately by re-sending
This communication to the sender and delete the original message and any copy of it from your
computer system.
Thank you for your cooperation.
On Jul 24, 2019, at 2:45 PM,
wrote:
Hi Daniel,
I wanted to follow up to check in-please let us know if you're having any issues connecting with the FBI's victim
coordinator, or if there are any other concerns we can address.
Thanks,
EFTA00014622

=== Page 2 ===
From:
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 12:05 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Daniel,
Thanks for calling yesterday. We want to make sure Ms.
has resources as a crime victim, and to that end, as we
discussed, please feel free to contact the FBI's victim coordinator, who can speak with you about resources that might be
available to Ms.
The FBI representative is
Her number is
Our primary concern is Ms.
safety and wellness, so please do not hesitate to reach out if there are any issues.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
EFTA00014623


c1: EFTA00014367
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014367.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
WARRANTY DEED
THIS INDENTURE made the 21 day of January, 2016 between GSJ Properties Corp., a Virgin
Islands Corporation. 5143 Palm Passage. Suites 18B and 19B, St. Thomas. USVI 00802. (hereinafter the
"Grantor") and Great St. Jim. LLC, a Virgin Islands Limited Liability Company, c/o Kellerhals Ferguson
Kroblin PLLC. Royal Palms Professional Building. 9053 Estate Thomas. Suite 101. St. Thomas. VI 00802
(hereinafter referred to as "Grantee").
WITNESSETH: That the Grantor. for and in consideration of the sum of FIVE MILLION and
00/100 DOLLARS ($5,000,000.00), paid by the Grantee. the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and
other good and valuable consideration, do hereby grant and convey unto the Grantee. its successors and assigns,
in fee simple absolute forever. all of its right, title and interest in and to the following described real property.
Parcel B-1 Rem Great St. James Island,
Parcel
B-1-1
Great
St.
James
Island
Parcel B-1-2 Great St. James Island
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
St. Thomas. Virgin Islands
As shown on PWD No. D9-7344-T004
As shown on PWD No. D9-7344-T004
As shown on PWD No. D9-7344-T004
Consisting of 10.3 U.S. Acres +/-
Consisting of 2.6 U.S. Acres +/-
Consisting of 19.7. U.S. Acres +/-
Parcel B-2 Rem Great St. James Island
Parcel B-2-1 Great St. James Island
Parcel B-2-2 Great St. James Island
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
As shown on PWD No. D9-7345-T004
As shown on PWD No. D9-7345-T004
As shown on PWD No. D9-7345-T004
Consisting of 4.4 U.S. Acres +/-
Consisting of 1.36 U.S. Acres +/-
Consisting of 2.4 U.S. Acres +/-
Parcel C-1 Rem Great St. James Island Parcel C-1-1 Great St. James Island
Parcel C-1-2 Great St. James Island
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
As shown on PWD No. D9-7347-T004
As shown on PWD No. D9-7347-T004
As shown on PWD No. D9-7347-T004
Consisting of 26.9 U.S. Acres +/-
Consisting of 2.77 U.S. Acres +/-
Consisting of 2.89 U.S. Acres +/-
Parcel C-2 Rem Great St. James Island
Parcel C-2-1 Great St. James Island
Parcel C-2-2 Great St. James Island
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
No. 6A Red Hook Quarter
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands
As shown on P.W.D. No. D9-7346-T004
As shown on PWD No. D9-7346-T004
As shown on PWD No. D9-7346-T004
Consisting of 2.5 U.S. Acres +/-
Consisting of 2.4 U.S. Acres +/-
Consisting of 3,0 U.S. Acres +/-
BEING THE SAME PREMISES which were conveyed to the Grantor by Warranty Deed
dated April 1. 2010 from Helle Bungaard and Steen Bungaard, recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Deeds
for St. Thomas and St. John on May 11, 2011, as Doc. No. 2011003242 and Warranty Deed dated April 1. 2010
from John Knud Fürst. Nina Fürst and Kim Fürst. recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Deeds for St.
Thomas and St. John on January 11, 2016, as Doc. No. 3016000170 .
respectively.
TOGETHER WITH any improvements thereon. and the rights. privileges and appurtenances
belonging thereto:
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises conveyed hereby unto the Grantee. its successors
and assigns. in fee simple absolute forever.
00 Doc#
SUBJECT. HOWEVER. to Virgin Islands zoning regulations and to the covenants
restrictions. easements and agreements of record.
I
EFTA00014367

=== Page 2 ===
027136
SUBJECT. HOWEVER, to Virgin Islands zoning regulations and to the covenants restrictions,
casements and agreements of record.
AND THE GRANTOR WARRANTS that he is seized of the premises in fee simple and that he has
good right to convey the premises, that Grantee shall quietly enjoy the premises: that the premises are free
fro m encumbrances except as set forth or referred to herein; that Grantor will execute or procure any further
necessary assurances of title to the premises and that Grantor will forever warrant and defend title to the
premises
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this warranty deed the day and year first above
written.
WITNESS
GSJ Properties Corp., a Virgin Islands Corporation
Gaylen SayLiN Voge Vogel
by: FOR Kevin F. D' Amour. President
Dona flack
Attested:
Donna slack
by: Jeannette
Jeannette Casey, Secretary Casey
Book:
Pages: 0000
Doc# 2016000576
Filed & Recorded
01/28/2016 2:50PM
ERICA DOVER, M.P.A.
RECORDER OF DEEDS
TERRITORY OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
)
ST THOMAS/ST JOHN
DISTRICT OF ST THOMAS AND ST. JOHN
RECORDING FEE
)
SS.
$ 5,012.00
DEED DOC STAMP 3.0
$ 150,000.00
PER PAGE FEE
$
5.00
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 21st day of January. 2016 by $ Kevin 44.00 F.
ATTACHMNT FEE
D' Amour as President for and on behalf of GSJ Properties Corp. a Virgin Islands Corporation.
Carrie Delight de Lear
Notary Public
Carrie DeLight De Leon
Notary Public
St. Thomas - St. John, USVI
00 Doc#
NP- 108-12
Comm. Exp. 12/12/2016
2
EFTA00014368

=== Page 3 ===
NOTED IN THE CADASTRAL RECORDS
FORGOUNTRY / TOWN PROPERTY, BOOK FOR
GREAT ST. JAMES ISLAND
NO. 6 A RED HOOK QUARTER
ST. THOMAS VIRGIN ISLANDS
As sessor Office / Cadastral Division
Thomas Dated: JANUARY 21, 2016
Wayne D. Vallwood
Office of the Lieutenant Governor / Public Surveyor
ATTEST:
It is hereby certified that the above mentioned
property/s which, according
to WARRANTY DEED dated January 21, 2016
GREAT ST. JIM, LLC, a Virgin Islands Limited Liability Company (GRANTEE)
belongs to:
has not according to the Record of this office,
undergone changes as to boundaries and area.
Tax Assessor Office / Cadastral Division
21, 2016
Jallwood
Office of the Lieutenant Governor / Public Surveyor
EFTA00014369

=== Page 4 ===
COMMISSION OF THE
UNITED STATES VIRGIN
GOVERNMENT OF
THE UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS
OFFICE OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
DIVISION OF REAL PROPERTY TAX
1105 King Street Christiansted Virgin Islands 00820 340.773.6449
Fax 340.773.0330
18 Kongens Gade Charlotte Amalle. Virgin Islands 00802 340.774.2991 Fax 340.774.6953
REAL PROPERTY TAX CLEARANCE LETTER
TO:
Recorder Of Deeds
FROM:
Office of the Tax Collector
In accordance with Title 28, Section 121, as amended, this shall certify that
there are no outstanding Real Property Tax obligations for the following:
PARCEL NUMBER
1-09801-0102-00
B-1&B-2 GREAT ST JAMES ISLAND
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
RED HOOK QTR.
OWNER'S NAME
GSJ PROPERTIES CORP
Taxes have been researched up to and including
2015
.
CERTIFIED TRUE AND CORRECT BY
LUDENCE ROMNEY
TAX COLLECTOR
LEAF
SIGNATURE
Doc# 2016000576
01/22/2016
DATE
EFTA00014370

=== Page 5 ===
OF THE
UNITED STATES VIRGIN BLANK
GOVERNMENT OF
THE UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS
OFFICE OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
DIVISION OF REAL PROPERTY TAX
1105 King Street Christiansted Virgin Islands 00820 340.773.6449 Fax 340.773.0330
18 Kongens Gode Charlotte Amalle, Virgin Islands 00802 340.774.2991 Fax 340.774.6953
REAL PROPERTY TAX CLEARANCE LETTER
TO:
Recorder Of Deeds
FROM:
Office of the Tax Collector
In accordance with Title 28, Section 121, as amended, this shall certify that
there are no outstanding Real Property Tax obligations for the following:
PARCEL NUMBER
1-09801-0103-00
C-1&C-2 GREAT ST JAMES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ISLAND
No.6A RED HOOK QTR.
OWNER'S NAME
FURST, JOHN K., KIM & NINA
Taxes have been researched up to and including
2015
-
CERTIFIED TRUE AND CORRECT BY
DELBERT HEWITT
CHIEF OF STAFF
SIGNATURE
Doc# 2016000576
11/09/2015
DATE
EFTA00014371


c1: EFTA00015527
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015527.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
Subject: Accepted: Call with FBI (Epstein)
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 22:36:48 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: unnamed
EFTA00015527


c1: EFTA00015280
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015280.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
(USANYS)"
Subject: RE: Phone Call Follow-Up
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 18:54:08 +0000
Inline-Images: image001.png
Thanks,
We appreciate the help. I know this has been a big headache and created a lot of problems not just for us but
for a number of other units, and we really appreciate you trying to get us across the finish line.
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2020 2:42 PM
To:
(USANYS)
is
(USANYS)
Subject: RE: Phone Call Follow-Up
Understood
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2020 2:41 PM
To:
(USANYS)
is
(USANYS)
Subject: RE: Phone Call Follow-Up
Thanks,
The problem is the stuff that is coming today is stuff the team asked PAE to process in early September. I
realize that this is a big project and that there's only so much that can be done, but it poses almost insurmountable timing
hurdles for our team if it is taking 1-2 months for PAE to get us stuff we ask for out of Relativity. In most of our cases, this
one included, that eats up a huge chunk of the time we have available to produce discovery.
We'll follow up early next week to see if there is a more concrete update, but I think this may require a broader or higher
level explanation to the Court. I am concerned about requiring our team to take the hit with Judge Nathan for missing
this deadline.
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2020 12:51 PM
To:
(USANYS)
is
(USANYS)
Subject: FW: Phone Call Follow-Up
Some of the data is being sent to use today by FedEX. However, there is a ton of stuff still being processed. That stuff is
still being imaged. Then it gets marked. Then copied to us. I have spoken to
He thinks it is not possible to
meet the November 9 date. He thinks the next step might be done on Tuesday, and then a better estimate of completion
might be possible.
From:
[US]
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2020 12:25 PM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
(USANYS) [Contractor]
Subject: Phone Call Follow-Up
Good Afternoon
EFTA00015280

=== Page 2 ===
Following up on our earlier phone conversation, a hard drive with the following productions is being sent to SDNY via
FedEx with the following productions in the US V. Epstein workspace:
1) SDNYPROD008
2) SDNYPROD009
3) SDNYPROD010
4) SDNYPROD011 (Note: this is a six-part production)
5) SDNYPROD012
6) SDNYPROD013
7) SDNYPROD014
There are approximately 1.2 million records currently being imaged. The images will be available on Monday, November
2, 2020 at the earliest. The production of the records will begin as soon as the images are available in the workspace.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Lead E-Discovery Analyst
e.
7799 Leesburg Pike, Suite 300N
Falls Church, Virginia 22043
PAE
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this message may be privileged, business sensitive, proprietary,
copyrighted, protected from disclosure and/or subject to US export controls. If you are not the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by replying to the
message and deleting it from your computer. #-SEC-#
EFTA00015281


c1: EFTA00015630
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015630.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To: Raymond L Colon
Cc:
Subject: RE: Congratulations
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 16:00:22 +0000
Importance: Normal
Hi Ray,
There are no changes to the plea agreement I sent on Wednesday, 7/3 -- attached again here. And the Magistrate
Court sent an email yesterday scheduling the plea for tomorrow (Wednesday, July 10) at 11:30 a.m. (their email
was sent at 10:18 a.m. yesterday). So we're on for tomorrow, 11:30 a.m. at the Magistrate's Court in 5A, and
should be all set.
thanks,
Original Message
From: Raymond L Colon <rlcolonesq@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 10:17
To:
)
Subject: Re: Congratulations
Please send me the plea agreement today.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 9, 2019, at 10:16 AM, Raymond L Colon <1
wrote:
>
> Are we still on for tomorrow? Any confirmation on the time?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 8, 2019, at 9:25 PM, Raymond L Colon
wrote:
Job well done. Congratulations on the Epstein case.
Sent from my iPhone
EFTA00015630


c1: EFTA00016725
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016725.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 348 Filed 10/15/21 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
USDC SDNY
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 10/15/21
United States of America,
-v-
20-CR-330 (AJN)
Ghislaine Maxwell,
ORDER
Defendant.
ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:
The Court is in receipt of Defendant's letter regarding delivery of Defendant's legal mail
at MDC. Dkt. No. 346. The Government is hereby ORDERED to respond as soon as possible
but by no later than today, October 15, 2021 at 5:00 p.m.
so ORDERED.
Dated: October 15, 2021
Alim D. D.Nitto
New York, New York
ALISON J. NATHAN
United States District Judge
1
EFTA00016725


c1: EFTA00014411
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014411.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
Cc:
)"
Subject: FW: travel approval request
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 20:19:55 +0000
Following up on this, in connection with the L.A. trip, could you please book me on the following flights:
Feb. 25, Delta, JFK to LAX, 11:40 a.m. (arriving 3:12 p.m.)
Feb. 28, Delta, LAX to JFK, 11:55 p.m. (arriving Feb. 29, 8:25 a.m.)
And as referenced below, I made a hotel reservation at a Hilton, for the same trip. And we'll need a conference room
there for Wednesday, February 26, from approximately 11:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. (or all day if that's the way they do it).
thanks,
From:
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 01:15
To:
Cc:
in
Subject: FW: travel approval request
just FYI, in connection with this trip to Los Angeles, I just made a reservation for a hotel on E2 (see attached) - if I
did anything wrong, it can be changed, but it's a hotel that is almost never available for us so I wanted to make the
reservation tonight just in case. And will follow up with flights in the coming days. Happy to chat if that's useful, and
thanks very much.
From:
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2020 22:55
To:
Cc:
is
i
Subject: Re: travel approval request
Approved
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 12, 2020, at 9:14 PM,
wrote:
EFTA00014411

=== Page 2 ===
Similar to prior requests in connection with the Epstein investigation (2018R01618), we'd like to please request
permission for the team to travel next week for three interviews in Los Angeles on February 26, 27, and 28 (we have at
least one interview on each of those days). We expect to be traveling, respectively, some combination of the 25th to the
29th. Also similar to prior trips, we'd like to request approval to get a conference room for one of those dates (the
26th).
thank you,
From:
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 14:49
To:
Cc:
y
V.
Subject: RE: travel approval request
Similar to prior requests in connection with the Epstein investigation (2018R01618), but with an added international
element, we'd like to please request permission for the team to travel next week for an interview near Stockholm,
Sweden, next week on January 29th and/or 30th. We expect to be traveling, respectively, some combination of the 27th
(overnight) to the 31st, depending on when the interview ends up being scheduled, and we'll put final dates on our
formal applications. Also similar to prior trips, we'd like to request approval to get a conference room for one of those
days at a hotel for the interview itself.
Also based on our discussion earlier we'll be mindful of looking for domestic (or domestic-flagged) carrier flights, as well
as the costs of any alternatives, in looking at possible specific bookings. Thanks as always for your help and input on
that.
thank you,
From:
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 09:58
To:
Cc:
is
V.
Subject: RE: travel approval request
Similar to prior requests in connection with the Epstein investigation (2018R01618), we'd like to please request
permission for the team to travel next week for an interview (or possibly interviews) in Los Angeles on December 16
and/or 17. We expect to be traveling, respectively, some combination of the 15th to the 18th. Also similar to prior trips,
we'd like to request approval to get a conference room for one of those days.
thank you,
EFTA00014412

=== Page 3 ===
From:
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2019 16:53
To:
Cc:
is
)
is
Subject: RE: travel approval request
Similar to prior requests in connection with the Epstein investigation (2018R01618), we'd like to please request
permission for the team to travel next week for an interview in Los Angeles on November 14. We expect to be traveling,
respectively, some combination of the 13th to the 15th (and no conference room necessary for this trip).
thanks,
From:
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 13:55
To:
Cc:
is
is
)
is
Subject: RE: travel approval request
Similar to prior requests in connection with the Epstein investigation (2018R01618), we'd like to please request
permission to travel next week for an interview in West Palm Beach on November 4. It will just be me and
and we'll travel some combination of the 3rd to the 5th. And also same as last time, we'd like to ask permission to
reserve a conference room at the hotel on that Monday for the interview, please.
thanks very much,
From:
)
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 14:51
To:
Cc:
is
Subject: RE: travel approval request
Again in connection with the Epstein investigation (2018R01618), we'd like to please request permission to travel next
week for a victim interview in Los Angeles. As of now we tentatively expect to fly down Wednesday and return no later
than Friday (and will keep the timeframe as short as scheduling allows). The trip will be some combination of me,
and/or
as previously. And also same as last time, we'd like to ask permission to reserve a conference
room at the hotel on Thursday for the interview, please.
thanks very much,
EFTA00014413

=== Page 4 ===
From:
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2019 14:57
To:
Cc:
is
is
Subject: RE: travel approval request
Again in connection with the Epstein investigation, we'd like to please request permission to travel for approximately
three days next week for meetings and interviews in West Palm Beach, Florida. As of now we tentatively expect to fly
down Tuesday night and return on Wednesday or Thursday (and will keep the timeframe as short as scheduling allows).
Unfortunately we're still trying to pin down timing for interviewing the victims, so depending on the timing it will either
be me and
or
and
but we wanted to ask for permission now either way so we weren't doing it
super last minute after the holiday on Tuesday. And also same as last time, we'd like to ask permission to reserve a
conference room at the hotel for the interviews, please.
thanks very much,
From:
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2019 20:57
To:
Subject: RE: travel approval request
Thank you
From:
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2019 20:46
To:
Cc:
is
Subject: Re: travel approval request
Approved
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 3, 2019, at 8:02 PM,
)
> wrote:
For the same case as below, United States V. Epstein, 2018R01618, an investigation relating to enticement of minors for
sexual activity,
and I would like to please request permission to travel for approximately three days next week
for meetings and interviews in West Palm Beach, Florida. As of now we tentatively expect to fly down Tuesday night
and return on Friday, though we will shorten the timeframe if scheduling allows.
Please let us know if any other information would be helpful, and thanks very much.
EFTA00014414

=== Page 5 ===
From:
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 18:32
To:
Cc:
Subject: travel approval request
and I would like to please request permission for travel for United States V. Epstein, 2018R01618, an
investigation relating to enticement of minors for sexual activity, for two days of meetings and interviews in West Palm
Beach and/or Fort Lauderdale, Florida. As of now we're hoping to fly down next Wednesday night and return on
Saturday.
Please let us know if any other information would be helpful, and thanks as always.
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York
EFTA00014415


c1: EFTA00016344
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016344.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: subpoena for mailing
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 13:35:38 +0000
Attachments: 2020-06-29,_subpoena_to_UBS.pdf
As discussed, could you please put the attached subpoena in the mail this morning? Let me know if any questions or
issues, otherwise should be all set.
thanks very much,
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York
EFTA00016344


c1: EFTA00014598
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014598.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: Michael Bachner
To:
Cc:
)"
)"
Subject: Re: Epstein investigation
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:38:16 +0000
Inline-Images: ~WRD000.jpg
Thanks for the heads up
Michael Bachner
Bachner & Associates, PC
39 Broadway-Suite 1610
New York, NY 10006
Please excuse typographical errors. Messages sent through dictation.
https://www.actl.com/
NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is legally privileged and/or
confidential information, which is intended only for use of recipient. If the reader of this communication is not
the intended recipient (or the agent or employee responsible to deliver it to the intended (recipient), you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication by error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail and delete this
email from your system. Nothing in this email should be construed as a legal opinion or tax advice.
On Jul 17, 2019, at 2:08 PM,
)
wrote:
Michael,
Just in an abundance of caution, wanted to let you know that our conference in this case tomorrow was just moved
from 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. We think that should still leave more than enough time to complete the hearing and be
back for our 2:00 discussion, but we wanted to advise in case the conference goes extraordinarily long - if so, we'll come
back to meet you as soon as it is completed.
thanks,
From: Michael Bachner
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2019 19:52
To:
Cc:
is
Subject: Re: Epstein investigation
EFTA00014598

=== Page 2 ===
Hi. Perfect. 2:00?
Michael Bachner
Bachner & Associates, PC
39 Broadway-Suite 1610
New York, NY 10006
Please excuse typographical errors. Messages sent through dictation.
https://www.actl.com/
NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is legally privileged and/or
confidential information, which is intended only for use of recipient. If the reader of this communication is not
the intended recipient (or the agent or employee responsible to deliver it to the intended (recipient), you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication by error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail
and delete this email from your system. Nothing in this email should be construed as a legal opinion or tax
advice.
On Jul 15, 2019, at 7:29 PM,
)
wrote:
Hi Michael,
How about Thursday afternoon?
Thanks,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York NY 10007
From: Michael Bachner
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2019 7:20 PM
To:
)
EFTA00014599

=== Page 3 ===
Cc:
>;
Subject: Re: Epstein investigation
Any updates on dates?
Michael Bachner
Bachner & Associates, PC
39 Broadway-Suite 1610
New York, NY 10006
Please excuse typographical errors. Messages sent through dictation.
<~WRD000.jpg>
https://www.actl.com/
NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is legally privileged and/or
confidential information, which is intended only for use of recipient. If the reader of this communication is
not the intended recipient (or the agent or employee responsible to deliver it to the intended (recipient), you
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication by error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail
and delete this email from your system. Nothing in this email should be construed as a legal opinion or tax
advice.
On Jul 15, 2019, at 2:28 PM, Michael Bachner
wrote:
I was just notified that a client was arrested and is being arraigned in Queens County tomorrow on
a state RICO charge at about 11 or 1130. I'm concerned that the 330 may be cutting it close. It may be better
to do it at four or on Wednesday. Please advise
Michael Bachner
Bachner & Associates, PC
39 Broadway-Suite 1610
New York, NY 10006
Please excuse typographical errors. Messages sent through dictation.
<~WRD000.jpg>
https://www.actl.com/
NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is legally privileged and/or
confidential information, which is intended only for use of recipient. If the reader of this communication is
not the intended recipient (or the agent or employee responsible to deliver it to the intended (recipient), you
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication by error, please immediately notify the sender by e-
EFTA00014600

=== Page 4 ===
mail and delete this email from your system. Nothing in this email should be construed as a legal opinion or
tax advice.
On Jul 15, 2019, at 1:55 PM,
)
wrote:
Thanks very much. Let's plan for tomorrow at 3:30pm. You and
can come to our office at 1 St.
Andrews and just give security my name.
Best,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
Original Message
From: Michael Bachner
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2019 1:42 PM
To:
Cc:
)
)
Subject: RE: Epstein investigation
/
Hi
Tomorrow or Wednesday at 11 or 3:30. Thursday any time after 11:30 to 4.
https://www.actl.com/
Michael Bachner, Esq.
Bachner & Associates, PC
39 Broadway, Suite 1610
New York, NY 10006
www.bhlawfirm.com
CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE: This E-mail (including any attachments) is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC Sections 2510-2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged.
EFTA00014601

=== Page 5 ===
If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution,
or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received
the message in error and then delete it. Thank you.
Original Message
From:
)
[mailto:
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2019 12:50 PM
To: Michael Bachner
Cc:
)
)
Subject: Re: Epstein investigation
/
Hi Michael,
Apologies for the delay. Would you please let us know what times would work for you and
in
the next two or three days? We'll then figure out a time when we can all meet.
Thank you,
On Jul 11, 2019, at 10:43 PM, Michael Bachner
wrote:
Hello
6 o'clock is somewhat late. The client lives in
Michael Bachner
Bachner & Associates, PC
39 Broadway-Suite 1610
New York, NY 10006
Please excuse typographical errors. Messages sent through dictation.
[X]
https://www.actl.com/
NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is legally privileged and/or confidential
information, which is intended only for use of recipient. If the reader of this communication is not the
intended recipient (or the agent or employee responsible to deliver it to the intended (recipient), you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication by error, please immediately notify the sender by e-
mail and delete this email from your system. Nothing in this email should be construed as a legal opinion
or tax advice.
On Jul 11, 2019, at 9:01 PM,
)
<mailto:
wrote:
Michael,
Would 7/16 at around 6pm work for the reverse proffer in our office at 1 St. Andrews?
EFTA00014602

=== Page 6 ===
Thanks,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York. NY 10007
<mailto:
From: Michael Bachner
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 12:26 PM
To:
<mailto:
Cc:
<mailto:
<mailto:
Subject: Re: Epstein investigation /
Regarding the reverse proffer, We are available next week from the 15-18. I have a 2 o'clock meeting in
my office on the 16th and 17th that should last an hour. So I can meet with you on those days at 11 or 1030
in the morning if that works. Please let me know
Michael Bachner
Bachner & Associates, PC
39 Broadway-Suite 1610
New York, NY 10006
Please excuse typographical errors. Messages sent through dictation.
<~WRD000.jpg>
https://www.actl.com/
NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is legally privileged and/or confidential
information, which is intended only for use of recipient. If the reader of this communication is not the
intended recipient (or the agent or employee responsible to deliver it to the intended (recipient), you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication by error, please immediately notify the sender by e-
mail and delete this email from your system. Nothing in this email should be construed as a legal opinion
or tax advice.
On Jul 10, 2019, at 11:20 AM, Michael Bachner
wrote:
Sure.
EFTA00014603

=== Page 7 ===
Michael Bachner
Bachner & Associates, PC
39 Broadway-Suite 1610
New York, NY 10006
Please excuse typographical errors. Messages sent through dictation.
<~WRD000.jpg>
https://www.actl.com/
NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is legally privileged and/or confidential
information, which is intended only for use of recipient. If the reader of this communication is not the
intended recipient (or the agent or employee responsible to deliver it to the intended (recipient), you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication by error, please immediately notify the sender by e-
mail and delete this email from your system. Nothing in this email should be construed as a legal opinion
or tax advice.
On Jul 10, 2019, at 11:08 AM,
)
<mailto:
wrote:
Mike,
I think it would be useful to get a better understanding of your position-it would be helpful for us to
know, for example, how much time you propose to take to evaluate matters, and whether we can provide
any additional information that might be useful for that process of evaluation. That likely will affect our
determination regarding the grand jury appearance, at which we would expect, were we to call
to ask her a number of questions we would expect to argue to the court do not implicate a fifth amendment
privilege-i.e., that she couldn't simply blanket invoke. Would it be useful to discuss via phone?
thanks,
From: Michael Bachner
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2019 10:25
To:
<mailto:
Cc:
<mailto:
<mailto:
Subject: Re: Epstein investigation
Dear Counsel:
I met with
and I need time to evaluate matters. Regarding the subpoena to testify before the
Grand Jury on
we hereby notify you that if called as a witness
would invoke her Fifth
Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination. Please let me know if you will require her to
invoke in person or whether this communication suffices and no appertaining will be required.
Yours truly,
Michael Bachner
EFTA00014604

=== Page 8 ===
Michael Bachner
Bachner & Associates, PC
39 Broadway-Suite 1610
New York, NY 10006
Please excuse typographical errors. Messages sent through dictation.
<~WRD026.jpg>
https://www.actl.com/
NOTICE: The information contained in this communication is legally privileged and/or confidential
information, which is intended only for use of recipient. If the reader of this communication is not the
intended recipient (or the agent or employee responsible to deliver it to the intended (recipient), you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication by error, please immediately notify the sender by e-
mail and delete this email from your system. Nothing in this email should be construed as a legal opinion
or tax advice.
On Jul 9, 2019, at 11:43 AM,
)
<mailto:
wrote:
Mr. Bachner,
Following up on our conversation earlier this morning, we wanted to provide you with the additional
information and materials we discussed. In the first instance, so that you have full contact info for the
team, please feel free to reach out to any of us at any time; we're all available via email or at the following
phone numbers:
Additionally, attached are the non-prosecution agreement, previously publicly filed in civil proceedings in
Florida, and a blank version of our standard proffer agreement, both as discussed.
As we mentioned, please don't hesitate to reach out with any questions, and we look forward to setting a
time to speak again after you're able to confer with
thank you,
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York
<blank proffer agreement.pdf>
Epstein NPA, dated 2007-09-24.pdf>
EFTA00014605


c1: EFTA00016392
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016392.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject: Corrected Maxwell Arrest Warrant
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 18:06:09 +0000
Attachments: Maxwell_Arrest_Warrant_(corrected).pdf
Apologies-I just realized that the warrant I send you had the wrong year on the date. Attached please find a corrected
version with the correct date. Would it be possible for Judge Smith to please sign this version? I will delete all copies of
the version with the incorrect date.
Thank you,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York NY 10007
EFTA00016392


c1: EFTA00015287
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015287.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: SDNY NEWS CLIPS, THURSDAY, JANUARY 28, 2021
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 19:23:45 +0000
Inline-Images: image001.png
OF
SDNY PRESS CLIPPINGS
ENTRE
DEPARTMENT
JUSTITIA
New York Post Ghislaine Maxwell forced girls into lurid performances for Jeffrey Epstein, court docs reveal Accused madam Ghislaine Maxwell once directed a room of underage girls to "kiss, dance and touch one
another in a sexual way" for late pedophile boss 5 hours ago (nypost
Ghislaine Maxwell said she learned of Epstein abuse claims in papers | Ghislaine Maxwell I The Guardian
Ghislaine Maxwell denies knowing scope of Jeffrey Epstein's sexual activities I. Reuters
Spokesman
United States Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney's Office I Southern District of New York
EFTA00015287


c1: EFTA00014701
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014701.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 11/22/21
United States of America,
-V-
20-CR-330 (AJN)
MEMORANDUM
OPINION & ORDER
Ghislaine Maxwell,
Defendant.
ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:
The Defense on November 1, 2021, noticed eight expert witnesses. Def. Br., Ex. 1
("Notice"). Two of those experts, Dr. Park Dietz and Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, are expected to offer
opinions that rebut opinions of the Government's expert witness, Dr. Lisa Rocchio. The
Government on November 8, 2021, filed a motion to partially preclude the testimony of Dr.
Dietz and Dr. Loftus. Dkt. No. 424. The Court has already addressed that motion.
On November 15, 2021, the Government moved to fully or partially preclude the
testimony of the remaining six experts. The Defense filed a response on November 19, 2021.
The Court addressed the admissibility of Dr. Ryan Hall in a separate written opinion. In
this opinion, the Court addresses the preliminary admissibility of Bennett Gershman based on the
parties' current proffers.
I.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Evidence 702 governs the admissibility of expert testimony. That rule
states:
A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or
education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:
1
EFTA00014701

=== Page 2 ===
(a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier
of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
(d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.
The Court exercises a "gatekeeper function" in assessing the admissibility of expert
testimony. Restivo V. Hessemann, 846 F.3d 547, 575 (2d Cir. 2017). To determine whether an
expert's method is reliable, the Court considers the non-exhaustive list provided by the Supreme
Court in Daubert, including whether the expert's method has been tested, whether it has been
subjected to peer review, the rate of error, standards controlling the method's operation, and
whether the method is accepted by the expert community. United States V. Kidd, 385 F. Supp. 3d
259, 263 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (citing Daubert V. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 593-94
(1993)).
But Rule 702 ultimately sets a "liberal" and "permissive" standard of admissibility.
Nimely V. City of New York, 414 F.3d 381, 395-96 (2d Cir. 2005). In particular, not every expert
admissible under Daubert need rely on a method that conforms with "the exactness of hard
science methodologies." E.E.O.C. V. Bloomberg L.P., No. 07-CV-8383 (LAP), 2010 WL
3466370, at *13-14 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2010) (quoting United States V. Simmons, 470 F.3d
1115, 1123 (5th Cir. 2006)).
Additionally, the procedure for disclosing expert witnesses is governed by Federal Rule
of Criminal Procedure 16. That rule states that when the Government makes a request, the
Defense "must give to the government a written summary of any testimony that the
defendant intends to use under Rule[ ] 702.
This summary must describe the witness's
2
EFTA00014702

=== Page 3 ===
opinions, the bases and reasons for those opinions, and the witness's qualifications." Fed. R.
Crim. P. 16(b)(1)(C). The purpose of this rule is to "minimize surprise that often results from
unexpected expert testimony, reduce the need for continuances, and to provide the opponent with
a fair opportunity to test the merit of the expert's testimony through focused cross-examination."
Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(1)(C) advisory committee's note to 1993 amendment. Thus, to satisfy Rule
16, a notice must not merely describe the "general topics" on which experts will testify but
actually "summarize the experts' opinions about those topics" and "describe the bases for the
experts' opinions." United States V. Ulbricht, 858 F.3d 71, 115 (2d Cir. 2017) (emphasis added);
United States V. Valle, No. 12-CR-847 (PGG), 2013 WL 440687, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 2, 2013)
("Merely identifying the general topics about which the expert will testify is insufficient; rather,
the summary must reveal the expert's actual opinions.").
If the Defense's disclosure of an expert witness does not satisfy Rule 16, the Court has
"broad discretion" to fashion an appropriate remedy. Ulbricht, 858 F.3d at 115. That discretion
is guided by factors including "why disclosure was not made, the extent of the prejudice, if any,
to the opposing party, the feasibility of rectifying that prejudice by a continuance, and any other
relevant circumstances." Id. (quoting United States V. Lee, 834 F.3d 145, 159 (2d Cir. 2016)).
When a disclosure merely lists general topics on which the expert might testify, the Second
Circuit has several times held that the district court has discretion to exclude the expert entirely.
See id. at 118; United States V. Vaccarelli, No. 20-3768-CR, 2021 WL 4805218, at *2 (2d Cir.
Oct. 15, 2021).
II.
Discussion
As a preliminary matter, the Defense argues that the Government's motion is
"premature" because the Government's arguments are about the relevance and prejudice of the
3
EFTA00014703

=== Page 4 ===
witnesses' testimony, not their qualifications or the reliability of their methods under Rule 702.
Def. Br. at 1, 5-6. But one aspect of the Rule 702 and Daubert inquiry is "fit," which asks
"whether expert testimony proffered in the case is sufficiently tied to the facts of the case that it
will aid the jury in resolving a factual dispute." Alto V. Sun Pharm. Indus., Inc., No. 1:19-CV-
09758 (GHW), 2021 WL 4803582, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 13, 2021) (quoting Daubert, 509 U.S. at
591). Fit is satisfied if the expert's opinion would assist the jury's decision on a relevant
question of fact without "usurp[ing] either the role of the trial judge in instructing the jury as to
the applicable law or the role of the jury in applying that law to the facts before it." Id. (quoting
United States V. Duncan, 42 F.3d 97, 101 (2d Cir. 1994)). The Court finds that at least some of
the Government's arguments that go to fit are ripe for preliminary resolution now. Other aspects
of the Government's motion can be resolved only with additional information and the context of
trial.
The Government moves to exclude the testimony of Bennett Gershman in its entirety. As
explained in the notice, Professor Gershman "is a leading authority on prosecutorial
misconduct." Notice at 12. The Defense expects that he will testify "on best practices to ensure
the integrity of any prosecution, focusing on investigation, witness preparation, media contact,
neutrality, obligations to provide accurate information, and relationship with crime victims, their
counsel, and case-related civil litigation." Id.
The Court will grant the Government's motion and exclude Gershman. First, his
expected testimony is irrelevant. At the November 1 pretrial conference, the Court ruled that it
would "preclude affirmative evidence by the defense that goes to the thoroughness of the
investigation." Nov. 1 Tr. at 17. As the Court explained, "[t]he length of the investigation, the
investigative techniques used, and the fact that the defendant was not initially a target of the
4
EFTA00014704

=== Page 5 ===
investigation are all irrelevant" to Ms. Maxwell's guilt. Id. at 19 (quoting United States V.
Duncan, No. 18-CR-289, 2019 WL 2210663 (S.D.N.Y. 2019)). The Court concludes that the
expected topics of Gershman's testimony-investigation, witness preparation, media contact,
being neutral and accurate, and relationships with victims-all fall within the rubric of attacking
the thoroughness of the investigation rather than being probative of Ms. Maxwell's guilt of the
crimes charged. In short, this testimony would run afoul of the instruction that the jury will
receive that "the government is not on trial." Id. at 23 (quoting United States V. Knox, 687 F.
App'x 51, 54 (2d Cir. 2017)).
The Court notes that a court in this district recently excluded Gershman's testimony in a
civil case in which he would have similarly criticized the SEC's investigation, including the use
of cooperating witnesses. SEC V. Collector's Coffee Inc., No. 19-CV-4355 (VM) (GWG), 2021
WL 3418829 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 5, 2021). That case differs from this one in several respects, but
that court's basic reasoning informs and supports the Court's decision here.
The Defense argues that the Court "expressly denied" prohibiting the Defense from
calling an expert witness like Gershman. Def. Br. at 17. Tellingly, the Defense quotes no
language from the Court for this proposition and instead cites only those pages of the Court's
oral ruling in which the Court explained that it "will permit relevant cross-examination of the
government's witnesses." Nov. 1 Tr. at 27. This language in no fashion supports the Defense's
request to admit an expert to testify about government investigative techniques. The Court
reiterates, however, that it will permit the Defense to pursue "lines of cross-examination of
government witnesses [that] would be relevant to impeach a witness by suggesting bias or
otherwise implicating their credibility," which could include the Defense's theory of witnesses'
motives for "implicating Ms. Maxwell after Jeffrey Epstein's death." Id. at 28-29.
5
EFTA00014705

=== Page 6 ===
Second, even if Gershman's testimony was relevant, Rule 403 prejudice would
substantially outweigh for the reasons given at the November 1 conference. Id. at 21-24.
Gershman's testimony would be likely to confuse the jury by suggesting that the Government's
choices of investigative techniques are relevant to guilt, it would conflict with the Court's
anticipated jury instruction that the Government is not on trial, it would substantially delay the
trial, and it would, at most, be cumulative of the Defense's arguments that there is inadequate
evidence on which to find Ms. Maxwell guilty. Indeed, placing an expert imprimatur on these
arguments would only enhance the Rule 403 prejudice.
Third, apart from Rule 401 and 403, the Defense's disclosure of Gershman does not
satisfy Rule 16. The Defense has listed only the general topics on which Gershman will testify,
like "investigation," "media contact," and "neutrality." Notice at 12. It does not mention
Gershman's actual opinions on these topics or the bases for those opinions. Nor does the
Defense's response brief add any detail about the content of Gershman's opinions. Def. Br. at
18. Indeed, the Defense's briefing on this issue mentions very little of Gershman's anticipated
testimony. Therefore, even if Rules 401 and 403 were satisfied, the Court would exclude
Gershman's testimony because the Defense has not yet satisfied Rule 16.
III.
Conclusion
The Court therefore grants the Government's motion to preclude Gershman's expert
testimony. Because this is a preliminary pre-trial ruling, it is possible that facts and
circumstances at trial would alter the Court's analysis. In that event, the Defense must re-raise
its request to admit Gershman as an expert witness.
6
EFTA00014706

=== Page 7 ===
so ORDERED.
Alim D.Netto
Dated: November 22, 2021
New York, New York
ALISON J. NATHAN
United States District Judge
7
EFTA00014707


c1: EFTA00015190
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015190.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
STATE OF NEW MEXICO
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
STATE
SEAL GREAT of THE OFFICE OFNEW
1912
HECTOR H. BALDERAS
ATTORNEY GENERAL
July 8, 2020
Acting United States Attorney
United States Attorney's Office
Via email to:
Re:
Request for asset forfeiture of property acquired by Jeffrey Epstein to commit
human trafficking in New Mexico at Zorro Ranch
Acting United States Attorney
.
Our office has provided investigative evidence regarding Jeffrey Epstein's use of the Zorro
Ranch, located in Stanley, New Mexico, to assist federal prosecutors. In furtherance of
achieving some measure of justice for victims of Epstein and his acolytes, I ask that any interests
belonging to Epstein's estate or co-conspirators be seized by federal authorities. We believe that
this ranch was used by Epstein and others to facilitate the commission and prolonged
concealment of his trafficking of children, such that seizure may be pursued in conjunction with
the pending criminal prosecution of Epstein's associates and co-conspirators.
My priority is to assist federal prosecution efforts in identifying any and all assets used by
Epstein and others in New Mexico to facilitate the commission and concealment of his crimes.
To this end, we call upon your office to include the improvements of this property and any
substitute assets as part of the civil forfeiture of property associated with any pending cases
against Epstein's estate or involved with the criminal prosecution of his co-conspirators.
In the event you need assistance investigating or eventually pursuing this avenue, I will gladly
offer the resources my office has available to ensure that all survivors of crimes committed in
New Mexico receive some measure of justice, closure, and eventual restitution.
EFTA00015190

=== Page 2 ===
Respectfully,
Claim
Clara Moran
Chief Deputy Attorney General
EFTA00015191


c1: EFTA00014416
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014416.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: "etravelservices@
To:
Subject: Travel Authorization 11061409 approved by
,
now awaiting further
approval
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 18:57:08 +0000
Importance: Normal
Dear
Travel authorization 11061409 has been approved by
now awaiting further approval.
Trip ID: 11061409
Traveler name:
Purpose: R20NYS13400 - Epstein Investigation Witness interviews
Destination:
United States
Dates: 2020-02-26 - 2020-03-02
Current status: Pending Authorization Approval
E2 Single Sign On Login (within DOJ Network Only):
https://dojnet.doj.gov/jmd/fs/e2-redirect.html
E2 Manual Login (User ID and Password):
https://e2.gov.cwtsatotravel.com
Thank you for using E2Solutions. Help and support is available online by selecting the 'Online Help' link.
Please note: Replies to this mailbox are not monitored.
Some E2 email notifications are optional. To manage your email notifications, go to E2 Solutions to change your
email settings. Click 'Profile' on the task bar and then click the 'Edit Email Notifications' link to manage the
emails that you receive from us.
Reference ID# T0007
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or proprietary information. If you received this e-
mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail and any attachments;
any further use of such e-mail or attachments is strictly prohibited.
EFTA00014416


c1: EFTA00016343
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016343.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
(NY) (FBI)"
Cc:
(NY) (FBI)"
)"
)"
Subject: RE: Maxwell's Credit Cards
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 16:12:11 +0000
Attachments: MAXWELL_CREDIT_CARD_SUMMARY_V1.pdf
,
I spoke with a representative from Amex in connection with the attached, and they said all Amex account
numbers start with 37, but the Amex number you sent starts with 34. Do we have returns from that card
currently, or is this an entirely new card request?
No problem either way, but I wanted to check since you said the closing date of the last statement was 12/18/19
so that made me think we might have some returns from that account already. Though looking at the returns we
received from Amex previously, I don't see it. Please let us know? Thanks very much.
Original Message
From:
(NY) (FBI)
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 11:41
To:
Cc:
(NY) (FBI)
i
)
i
)
Subject: Maxwell's Credit Cards
,
Per your request, attached is an analysis of Maxwell's credit cards included in the financial productions I
received.
The attached draft analysis is to be used for discussion purposes only and is subject to change.
Best
Forensic Accountant
FBI New York Field Office
26 Federal Plaza
NYC, NY 10278
Office:
EFTA00016343


c1: EFTA00016896
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016896.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To: Robert Glassman
Cc:
)"
>, Nathan Werksman
Subject: Re: SDNY investigation
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 15:13:49 +0000
Hi Robert- I just saw your email about scheduling. I'm checking with the team, but my cell is
if
you need to reach us. Thanks.
Sent from my iPhone
>
On Dec 16, 2019, at 6:52 AM, Robert Glassman
wrote:
V
>
what's your cell again?
>
>
> Robert S. Glassman
>
Panish Shea & Boyle
V
psblaw.com
>
>
On Dec 13, 2019, at 2:06 PM,
)
wrote:
>> Totally understand, just wanted to ask. We'll see you Monday at 11:00. And thanks for that additional info as
well.
Original Message
From: Robert Glassman
>>
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2019 16:14
To:
Cc:
)
)
>; ; Nathan Werksman
>>
Subject: Re: SDNY investigation
>>
,
unfortunately, we can't do earlier than 11. She just needs time to get to my office after taking care of
kid stuff etc.
>> Re the mom, my understanding is that she is overseas somewhere. Pretty sure she's not in the US. I will find
out and we can chat about it on Monday.
>>
Robert S. Glassman
Panish Shea & Boyle
>>
psblaw.com
>>>
On Dec 12, 2019, at 1:30 PM,
)
wrote:
EFTA00016896

=== Page 2 ===
Robert,
We wanted to ask if it might be possible to start at 10:00 on Monday rather than 11:00? If not, we totally
understand (I think you may have wanted time to meet with her before starting with us) but wanted to check.
Separately, I know
left you a message earlier, but since we're emailing about this we can just ask --
we were wondering if it might be possible to tell us where
mother currently lives? Not her literal
address, but just city and/or state -- we don't have any intention of contacting her before we speak to you and
your client in person, but just for our longer-term logistical planning, we're wondering where we would be
headed if and when an interview of her were to be appropriate.
thanks,
Original Message
From:
)
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 13:15
To: Robert Glassman
Cc:
Nathan Werksman
Subject: RE: SDNY investigation
Confirmed, thanks -- we'll see you then. And just on substance, I think we mentioned these topics when we
spoke on the phone earlier, but just to refresh, I expect we'll want to talk through some additional specifics on
travel, we'll talk more about other steps we'll be looking to take in our investigation for corroboration and what
the appropriate timing and format of that would be, and to start to talk about specific conduct by Epstein and/or
Maxwell to whatever extent
is comfortable with that at this stage. And we'll also likely refresh on
some other topics as well, but just to flag some of the more immediate areas we'll expect to cover. Let us know if
it's useful to chat again before Monday, otherwise we'll see you then.
thanks again,
Original Message
From: Robert Glassman
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 12:38
To:
Cc:
Nathan Werksman
Subject: RE: SDNY investigation
Let's do 11 a.m. on Monday.
Robert Glassman, Esq.
Panish Shea & Boyle LLP
CA 90025
Tel:
(
Fax:
Emai
Web: www.psblaw.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This e-mail may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s).
EFTA00016897

=== Page 3 ===
Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient
(or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail or telephone, and delete all
copies of this message.
If you are a potential client, the information you disclose to us by email will be kept in strict confidence and
will be protected to the full extent of the law. Please be advised, however, that Panish Shea & Boyle LLP and its
lawyers do not represent you until you have signed a retainer agreement with the firm. Until that time, you are
responsible for any statutes of limitations or other deadlines for your case or potential case.
Original Message
From:
)
[mailto:
Sent: Wednesday, December 11. 2019 8:26 AM
To: Robert Glassman
Cc:
Nathan Werksman
Subject: RE: SDNY investigation
Robert,
That's great, thanks very much. Do you have a preference on timing? Anytime that morning starting at 10:00
a.m. or later would be fine for us, or we could also start early afternoon if that's easier--whatever you and
prefer. And our hope is that we'd be able to cover everything on Monday, but we'll also be available on Tuesday
if that ends up being useful as well.
thanks,
Alex.
Original Message
From: Robert Glassman
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2019 20:59
To:
Cc:
Nathan Werksman
Subject: Re: SDNY investigation
Monday morning works at my office. Tuesday may also work too if you need more time. But confirm for
Monday.
Robert S. Glassman
Panish Shea & Boyle
psblaw.com
On Dec 10, 2019, at 9:35 AM,
)
wrote:
Robert,
Following up on our call, in terms of logistics, we can come to California to meet with
anytime this coming Sunday, Monday, or Tuesday, if any of those work? Also, if it's at all possible to either set
aside a significant amount of time on one day or--possibly preferably--a few hours on two consecutive days (and
EFTA00016898

=== Page 4 ===
if so, we could do the second meeting on Wednesday if that's helpful), that will allow us to review relevant case
notes, do quick research, or anything else that would provide for helpful follow-up where we'd just need a little
time between discussion sessions. And as always, happy to discuss via phone if that's helpful.
thanks,
Original Message
From:
)
Sent: Monday, December 09 2019 17:46
To: Robert Glassman
Cc:
; Nathan Werksman
Subject: RE: SDNY investigation
Thanks Robert -- we'll call you in 5-10 minutes, just gathering everybody up in the same place. Thanks
very much.
Original Message
From: Robert Glassman
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2019 17:34
To:
)
Cc:
; Nathan Werksman
Subject: Re: SDNY investigation
Yes. Call me on my cell today.
Robert S. Glassman
Panish Shea & Boyle
psblaw.com
On Dec 9, 2019, at 9:21 AM,
)
wrote:
Robert,
Checking in on the below -- is there a good time to chat this week?
thanks,
Original Message
From:
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2019 13:06
To: Robert Glassman
Cc:
Nathan Werksman
Subject: RE: SDNY investigation
Hi Robert,
EFTA00016899

=== Page 5 ===
Following up on our discussion a couple weeks ago, would it make sense to have a quick call later this
week or early next to check in on current status? We also have one additional data point we'd like to convey as
well, at your convenience.
thanks,
Original Message
From: Robert Glassman
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019 13:31
To:
Cc:
>; ; Nathan Werksman
Subject: Re: SDNY investigation
Thanks. Cell is best
Robert S. Glassman
Panish Shea & Boyle
psblaw.com
On Nov 22, 2019, at 10:14 AM,
wrote:
EFTA00016900


c1: EFTA00014659
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014659.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
)"
,
)"
Subject: Jury instructions letter
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 22:34:56 +0000
Attachments: 2021-11-20,_GM,_edits_to_limiting_instructions_v3.docx
Hey team,
Jury instructions letter attached. Comments welcome.
Thanks,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
New York, New York 10007
EFTA00014659


c1: EFTA00015019
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015019.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: Re: Ghislaine Maxwell 02879-509
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 23:29:16 +0000
What number should I call?
On Nov 18, 2020, at 5:59 PM
wrote:
Please call me at your earliest convenience.
BOBBI C STERNHEIM
11/18/2020 5:51 PM
Hi Nicole-
I have a confirmed legal call scheduled for tomorrow (Thursday)
and a confirmed in-person visit scheduled for Saturday
with my client, Ghislaine Maxwell 02879-509.
I am informed that Ms. Maxwell received a nasal swab test today
and is being placed in the SHU for 14 days.
Please confirm:
-whether she I being quarantined.
If so, please explain:
- the reason for the quarantine
- the duration of the quarantine
- whether she will be given legal calls
- whether her legal visits are canceled.
Your prompt response is requested and appreciated.
Thank you-
Bobbi
BOBBI C. STERNHEIM, ESQ.
Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim
**Covid-19 Notice: The West 19th Street office is currently closed but we continue to work remotely.
Please use email or fax, instead of regular mail, for all correspondence during this time.
We continue to work regular business hours throughout this situation.
Thank you for your consideration. Our best wishes for your good health and well being.
EFTA00015019

=== Page 2 ===
This message and any attached documents contain information from the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim
that may be confidential and/or privileged.
If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this information.
If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and
then delete this message. Thank you.
EFTA00015020


c1: EFTA00016449
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016449.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To: Gloria Allred
Cc:
)"
)"
Subject: Re: Call today
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 21:17:53 +0000
Inline-Images: image001.png; image002.png
Yes that works, thanks very much. We can use the below dial in:
On May 21, 2020, at 4:40 PM, Gloria Allred
wrote:
Yes. May I call you at 6P.M. e.s.t.? Would you like me to send a conference call number or just call your office below?
Gloria Allred
Allred, Maroko & Goldberg
6300 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1500
Los Angeles, CA 90048
323-653-6530
www.amglaw.com
www.gloriaallred.com
<image001.png>
<image002.png>
Inducted into National Women's Hall of Fame - 2019
From:
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2020 12:21 PM
To: Gloria Allred
Cc:
is
Subject: Call today
Gloria,
Would you be available for a quick call this afternoon? We have a couple quick questions for you relating to the Epstein
case. I'm available to talk any time.
Thanks,
EFTA00016449

=== Page 2 ===
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
This message is CONFIDENTIAL and may contain legally privileged information intended only for the addressee. If you are not the
addressee you may not use, forward, copy or disclose to anyone any information contained in this message. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS
COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY ALLRED, MAROKO & GOLDBERG IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONING THE SENDER NAMED
ABOVE AT 323-653-6530. Thank you.
GLORIAALLRED
2020
Best Lawyers
Martindale-Hubbell'
PREEMINENT
AV
Peer Rated for Highest Level
of Professional Excellence
2019
EFTA00016450


c1: EFTA00015713
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015713.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: "
)
1"
To:
(USANYS)"
(USANYS)"
(USANYS) 3"
Subject: Fwd: NYT article
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 12:11:46 +0000
will touch base with the PC team today to stay up to date. We have a subpoena out on our DB
AML investigation that should overlap.
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From:
"
(USANYS)"
Date: July 23, 2019 at 9:04:07 PM EDT
To: "
(USANYS)"
Cc:
(USANYS)"
"
)1"
Subject: Re: NYT article
Not at all, thanks for flagging.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 23, 2019, at 9:02 PM,
(USANYS)
wrote:
Great. Thanks. Sorry to have bothered about it.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 23, 2019, at 9:00 PM,
(USANYS)
wrote:
Yes, thanks. We've been getting docs from them pursuant to a subpoena and review is underway.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 23, 2019, at 8:57 PM,
(USANYS)
wrote:
EFTA00015713

=== Page 2 ===
Please pardon the interruption. Just confirming that you've all seen article in NYT re Epstein and
Deutsche Bk.
Sent from my iPhone
EFTA00015714


c1: EFTA00014153
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014153.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
(USAFLS)"
To:
(USAFLS)"
Bcc:
(USAFLS)"
Subject: Fw: Emailing: Response to Florida Bar Complaint v2.wpd
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:01:42 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: Response_to_Florida_Bar_Complaint_v2.wpd
I am hoping attachment will come thru. If so can you pdf and email to my hotmail?
Judge continued hrg until tomorrow
Iluvu
Original Message
From:
(USAFLS)
To:
(USAFLS);
(USAFLS)
Sent: Thu Nov 20 13:06:43 2008
Subject: Emailing: Response to Florida Bar Complaint v2.wpd
<<Response to Florida Bar Complaint v2.wpd>> Hi
and
-- I had hoped to finish this today, but two emergencies
came up. I am running off to Court -- with my Blackberry so you can let me know if I can open my mouth.
I asked for an obtained an extension to file this response, so it isn't due until a week from Friday. I will finish it up tomorrow and get it to
both of you and to
I only have a little bit left, so if you want to review the first 5 pages I would appreciate your thoughts.
Thanks.
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments:
Response to Florida Bar Complaint v2.wpd
Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your
e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled.
EFTA00014153


c1: EFTA00016267
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016267.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
(USANYS)"
Cc:
)"
)"
)"
Subject: FW: U.S. V. Maxwell, 20Cr330 (AJN) [Ms. Maxwell's Rule 16 Disclosures]
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 02:25:01 +0000
Attachments: Maxwell's_Rule_16(b)(1)(C)_Disclosures.zip
Inline-Images: image001.jpg
From: Nicole Simmons
Sent: Monday, November 1, 2021 10:18 PM
To:
)
is
>;
(USANYS)
is
)
Cc: Jeff Pagliuca
>; Laura Menninger
is
Subject: [EXTERNAL] U.S. V. Maxwell, 20Cr330 (AJN) [Ms. Maxwell's Rule 16 Disclosures]
Dear Counsel:
At the request of Jeffrey Pagliuca, please see attached Ms. Maxwell's Rule 16(b)(1)(C) Disclosures.
Thank you,
Nicole
Nicole Simmons
Haddon, Morgan and
Foreman, P.C.
www.hmflaw.com
EFTA00016267


c1: EFTA00016511
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016511.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: URGENT--Update Maxwell Victim Notice
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 17:28:16 +0000
Attachments: 344.pdf; 502.pdf
Inline-Images: image001.jpg
I think these two orders have the key info.
From:
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 12:12 PM
To:
is
Cc:
Subject: URGENT--Update Maxwell Victim Notice
Importance: High
See Ed Friedland's request below. Can you come up with a current update that explains whatever victims should
know about attending the trial? (And makes clear that the dial-in info for previous proceedings is no longer
applicable?)
can add it to our Maxwell victim page.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/united-states-v-ghislaine-maxwell
From: Edward Friedland
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 12:01 PM
To:
>;
Cc: Joseph Pecorino
>; Matthew Rogers
Subject: FW: Maxwell Link
This info on your web page is outdated and is causing the public to try and access the Maxwell matter by phone. Can you
pull down the access number info and update with the latest order which says in-person?
Edward A. Friedland, Esq.
District Court Executive
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
From: Joseph Pecorino
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 11:57 AM
To: Edward Friedland
Subject: Maxwell Link
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/united-states-v-ghislaine-maxwell
EFTA00016511

=== Page 2 ===
UNITED STATES DISTRIC COURT
Joseph Pecorino
STATE
WHY
Office of the District Executive
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
Email:
SOUTHERN DISTRIC OF NEWYORK
Office:
PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING THIS E-MAIL *****
EFTA00016512


c1: EFTA00015876
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015876.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: FW: Re: Jeffrey Epstein investigation
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2019 21:01:30 +0000
FYI
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2019 4:37 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Jeffrey Epstein investigation
Dea
Thank you for your interest in the case of U.S. V. Jeffrey Epstein. Attorney General Barr's chief of staff
has forwarded your questions and insights to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, as
the investigation that resulted in Jeffrey Epstein's July arrest was conducted by our office and the New York
Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Your questions and concerns have been forwarded to the
appropriate people here in our office. As I'm sure you can appreciate, we will be extremely limited in what we
can tell you about the ongoing investigation. You may nevertheless feel free to email me with any additional
information or questions, and I will forward them to the appropriate people here.
Jim Margolin
EFTA00015876


c1: EFTA00014625
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014625.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
(NY) (FBI)"
To:
)"
)"
Cc:
(NY) (FBI)"
)"
Subject: RE: financial documents (Epstein)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:31:33 +0000
We can call your desk line. Give us about 5-10min.
On Jul 23, 2019 1:30 PM, "
)"
wrote:
Hi all-
Let us know what works best from you on the FBI side. Do you want to call my desk when you're together? On our end,
we have another call at 2, but I don't expect this will take too long.
Thanks,
From:
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 12:38 PM
To:
)
Cc:
(NY) (FBI)
>;
is
(NY) (FBI)
is
)
Subject: Re: financial documents (Epstein)
I should be getting in the office around 130-145 today, I'd like to join.
On Jul 23, 2019, at 12:37,
wrote:
Of course - whoever wants to be on should join, the more the merrier
From:
(NY) (FBI)
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 11:07
To:
is
>;
is
(NY) (FBI)
Cc:
^
Subject: RE: financial documents (Epstein)
1:30 works for me. If possible, I would like Amanda to be on the call.
EFTA00014625

=== Page 2 ===
Best
From:
) [mailto:
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 10:54 AM
To:
(NY) (FBI)
>;
)
in
is
(NY) (FBI)
Cc:
)
Subject: RE: financial documents (Epstein)
Hi
With apologies for the delay in scheduling this, would a call at 1:30 today work? Thanks.
From:
(NY) (FBI)
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 7:33 PM
To:
>;
>;
is
(NY) (FBI)
Cc:
)
Subject: RE: financial documents (Epstein)
Looking forward to working with you as well. My Tuesday is open. Set a time that works for you.
Best
From:
)
[mailto:
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 6:58 PM
To:
is
>;
(NY) (FBI)
>;
(NY) (FBI)
Cc:
Subject: RE: financial documents (Epstein)
Hi
looking forward to working with you again! Aside from a court conference at 11 on Tuesday, I can make any
time work. Thanks.
From:
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 6:56 PM
To:
is
(NY) (FBI)
i
(NY)
(FBI)
Cc:
is
Subject: RE: financial documents (Epstein)
great to have you onboard, welcome - and as of now I don't have anything scheduled for Tuesday.
From:
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 16:49
EFTA00014626

=== Page 3 ===
To: Hamilton,
)
[Contractor] <AHamilton@usa.doj.gov>
Cc:
is
(NY) (FBI)
>;
is
is
(NY) (FBI)
Subject: Re: financial documents (Epstein)
I've CC'd the forensic accountant
in our squad who will be assisting in this investigation. Let's try and plan
a day next week to meet briefly and discuss a game plan. Are you guys around Tuesday to chat?
On Jul 18, 2019, at 11:17,
) [Contractor]
wrote:
I have the discs, where should I bring them?
From:
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 8:47 PM
To: Hamilton,
)
[Contractor] <AHamilton@usa.doj.gov>
Cc:
(NY) (FBI) <
i
is
is
)
Subject: RE: financial documents (Epstein)
Tomorrow morning could you please burn the following folders to a disc:
\\Usa.doj.gov\cloud\NYS\StAndrews\Shared\USvEpstein-2018R01618\Investigation\# 2018 SDNY
investigation\Subpoena Returns\American Express
\\Usa.doj.gov\cloud\NYS\StAndrews\Shared\USvEpstein-2018R01618\Investigation\#2018 SDNY
investigation\Subpoena_Returns\Deutsche_Bank
and put the disc in an envelope addressed to:
Special Agent
Detective
If it's possible to get the disc by 11:30, we'll give the disc to
t the conference, or if not, if you could
put the envelope with security and reply all that it's ready, they can pick up when convenient.
thanks,
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York
212.637.2415
EFTA00014627


c1: EFTA00014384
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014384.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
"
)"
Subject: transcript
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 16:22:39 +0000
Attachments: 2019-07-19,_Transcript.pdf; 2019-06-19,_Transcript.pdf
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
One Saint Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
EFTA00014384


c1: EFTA00015602
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015602.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From
To: Martin Weinberg
Subject: RE: U.S. V. Jeffrey Epstein
Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2019 22:15:13 +0000
Importance: Normal
Marty,
I'm sorry about that - I did email the two MCC counsel for whom I have contact information about 40 minutes ago, but
didn't hear back. In any event, we'll be in touch tomorrow.
thanks,
From: Martin Weinberg
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2019 18:13
To:
Cc: Martin Weinberg
Subject: Re: U.S. V. Jeffrey Epstein
Thanks for trying
I tried again, without success
Reid and i will call you in morning
Marty
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 7, 2019, at 5:23 PM,
wrote:
Marty,
Following up briefly on our earlier conversation, I wanted to advise you that we expect to be able to unseal the
indictment and have the case assigned to a district judge at approximately 9:15 a.m. tomorrow morning, after which we
can email and/or call you, or anyone you'd prefer we reach out to at that time.
Separately, I may have conveyed this previously, but in case not, please feel free to call my cell anytime tonight (or early
tomorrow morning) if it would be useful to speak after you've met with Mr. Epstein-there's no time too late or too
early to call, I'll be up. Particularly if you expect not to make a bail argument tomorrow, but rather consent to detention
without prejudice to make an application in the coming days-we would just want to let the judge know that early
tomorrow, if possible, if that's how you prefer to proceed. Certainly understand if not, of course, but just to mention it.
In any event, my cell is
Thank you, and talk soon.
From:
Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2019 20:52
To: 'Martin G. Weinberg'
EFTA00015602

=== Page 2 ===
Cc:
Subject: RE: U.S. V. Jenrey Epstem
Marty,
I hadn't seen your email from a few minutes ago, I think they crossed - while I go by
my email is
ut
now you have all the correct contact info.
With respect to the search, we'll follow up with you regarding the warrant - I believe a copy of the warrant and an
inventory either has been or will be (at the conclusion of the search) be delivered on site - but we are cognizant of
potential privilege issues and we appreciate you bring them to our attention as well.
thank you,
From: Martin G. Weinberg
Sent: Saturday. July 06 2019 20:48
To:
Subject: RE: U.S. V. Jeffrey Epstein
Thank You. Marty
Martin G. Weinberg, Esq.
This Electronic Message contains information from the Law
Office of Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the
addressee only. If you are not the addressee, please note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of
the contents of this message is prohibited.
From:
Sent: Saturday, July 6, 2019 8:38 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: U.S. V. Jeffrey Epstein
Mr. Weinberg,
Following up on our phone conversation this evening, attached please find the Indictment returned by the grand jury
against Mr. Epstein, who we understand you represent in connection with this case for current purposes. As discussed,
we expect that Mr. Epstein will be presented on Monday at the U.S. District Court at 500 Pearl Street - he will be
interviewed by Pretrial Services and then presented before either the duty magistrate judge or the district judge who is
assigned, which we also expect to occur on Monday.
As we discussed, the Indictment is attached. As we also discussed, the following is contact information for the AUSAs
involved in this case:
EFTA00015603

=== Page 3 ===
EFTA00015604


c1: EFTA00015174
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015174.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: 3500 Cover Letter
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2021 20:38:04 +0000
Attachments: 2021.10.11_Maxwell_Cover_Letter_v2.docx
Hi team,
Draft letter attached. Please review for accuracy and let me know if you have any edits. I included the language about
here, but thought it might read a little strange here? We could otherwise have the paralegals include it in the
3500 index in a footnote on the witness log document.
Thanks!
Assistant United States Attorney
United States Attorney's Office
Southern District of New York
New York, New York 10007
Tel:
EFTA00015174


c1: EFTA00015515
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015515.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 38 Filed 01/15/21 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
V.
20-CV-00833 (PAE)
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,
Defendant.
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF NICOLE MCFARLAND
I, Nicole McFarland, declare as follows:
1. I am employed by the United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons
("BOP"), as a Staff Attorney at the Metropolitan Correctional Center ("MCC"). My
employment history with the BOP is described in a declaration I submitted in the above-
captioned case on August 5, 2020 (the "Declaration").
2. I submit this declaration in support of the BOP's motion for summary judgment and to correct
certain statements in the Declaration that incorrectly described one record that BOP
produced in response to Plaintiffs' FOIA requests.
3. In Paragraphs 17 and 30 of the Declaration, I stated that MCC's searches for records
responsive to Plaintiff's FOIA request had located "one log book showing a visitor for
Jeffrey Epstein on July 30, 2020." I have since learned that this log book showed a phone
call Epstein made on July 30, 2020, not a visit that he received on that date. Specifically, the
log book is an Intake Screening Phone Log kept in the Receiving & Discharging area within
1
EFTA00015515

=== Page 2 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 38 Filed 01/15/21 Page 2 of 2
the MCC. I advertently described the log as showing a visit, when, in fact, it shows a phone
call.
4. For the same reason, Paragraph 28 of the Declaration should be corrected to reflect that the
searches at MCC located one log showing a phone call made by Epstein on July 30, 2020,
specifically the Intake Screening Phone Log described above.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $ 1746, I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed this 8th day of October 2020.
NMcPailand Nicole McFarland
Staff Attorney
Metropolitan Correctional Center
Bureau of Prisons
2
EFTA00015516


c1: EFTA00014355
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014355.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
Subject: RE: Epstein (records for Relativity upload)
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 16:47:22 +0000
Yup, all fixed - thank you
From:
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2019 09:42
To:
Subject: RE: Epstein (records for Relativity upload)
Please try to log into Relativity now and you should be able to access the database.
Thank you.
From:
Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2019 9:18 PM
To:
Subject: RE: Epstein (records for Relativity upload)
related to this, I'm getting a "contact your administrator" when I try to log onto Relativity - is it possible to make
sure I still have access, please? Thanks!
From:
Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2019 17:58
To:
Cc:
is
Subject: RE: Epstein (records for Relativity upload)
I've generally reviewed the PDF file creations and indices and overall I think they look good. A couple notes for the next
round of materials - most importantly, for any phone bills or invoices, in the index they create, please have them list the
phone number in the index along with the rest of the description of the file or document (so we can more easily search,
rather than having to rely on the OCR versions in Relativity). And then second, if in the index they can create a tab that
contains a column with just the document description (rather than the entire file extension, which it looks like they did for
these ones).
For this round, though, it looks good, and we'll have our paralegals make those changes for these docs. Accordingly, these
records can be uploaded into Relativity under the general folder "Florida investigation FOIA files". (Due to the events of
this weekend we no longer have active discovery obligations, but we will be reviewing the documents in connection with
the ongoing investigation.) Your door was locked so I put the envelope with the flash drive right outside your office.
The next round of materials is the set of discs we've been discussing over the past several days. Unfortunately for us,
there's likely to be a lot of overlap in this round of materials and the previous documents, because in theory they all come
from the same place, but we want to process all of them to make sure we're ultimately meeting any and all obligations. In
EFTA00014355

=== Page 2 ===
terms of the vendor, this newer set of docs should be easier because they should be already broken up into component
parts, but as discussed we'd like them to double-check that - and also to do the same type of index creation as in the last
round.
Please let us know if any other questions or issues, let me know if I'm forgetting anything, and thanks as always.
From:
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2019 11:08
To:
Subject: Epstein
Hello
The vendor has finished creating the new PDF files based on the 66 PDF files you gave to me in June. I have the data on a
flash drive and figured you would like to review the data before it is loaded to Relativity. Please let me know if you are in
your office and I will bring you the flash drive.
Thank you.
EFTA00014356


c1: EFTA00016589
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016589.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: Maxwell investigation, prosecution memo
Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 22:31:14 +0000
Attachments: 2020-05-22,
and_perjury_supplement.docx
Team,
Following up on our previous memo relating to the Maxwell investigation, and our subsequent discussions, please see the
attached supplemental memo, and we're available to discuss whenever would be convenient. In the meantime, we hope
everyone has a good holiday weekend.
thanks,
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York
EFTA00016589


c1: EFTA00014909
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014909.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Event: Accepted: Call/Meeting on Epstein
Start Date: 2018-12-07 16:00:00 +0000
End Date: 2018-12-07 17:00:00 +0000
Class: X-PERSONAL
Comment:
Date Created: 2018-12-07 03:44:42 +0000
Date Modified: 2018-12-07 03:44:42 +0000
Priority: 5
DTSTAMP: 2018-12-07 02:48:09 +0000
Attendee:
EFTA00014909


c1: EFTA00015569
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015569.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: Read: RE: US V. Epstein
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2019 13:48:32 +0000
Importance: Normal
EFTA00015569


c1: EFTA00014329
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014329.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
(USANYS) [Contractor]"
Subject: Read: US V. Epstein
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 16:56:56 +0000
Importance: Normal
EFTA00014329


c1: EFTA00016283
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016283.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: Goretti Moya <gmoya@sdreporters.com>
To:
Subject: [EXTERNAL] U.S. V GHISLAINE, MAXWELL
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2021 23:07:00 +0000
Attachments: LB1TMAXF.PDF
EFTA00016283


c1: EFTA00014507
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014507.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Subject: 2019 Right of Access Brown (Epstein).pdf
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 14:44:52 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: :2019_Right_of_Access_Brown_(Epstein).pdf
Not super relevant to Reporters Committee, but at least the latest word on the subject of right of public access
EFTA00014507


c1: EFTA00014975
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014975.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
11/26/21, 7:17 PM
Mail
(NY) (FBI) Outlook
RE: photo review/exhibit project
(NY) (FBI)
<
Thu 9/16/2021 12:58 PM
To:
I think we're playing phone tag now. Just called back
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 12:43 PM
To:
(NY) (FBI)
Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - RE: photo review/exhibit project
Just missed you I think. I'm
when you have a moment. Thanks.
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 12:23 PM
To:
Cc:
(USANYS)
(NY) (FBI)
<
is
Subject: RE: photo review/exhibit project
My work cell is:
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 11:58 AM
To:
(NY) (FBI)
Cc:
(USANYS)
V.
(NY) (FBI)
<
V.
(NYPD)
y
Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - Re: photo review/exhibit project
Thanks! What's the best number to reach you?
On Sep 16, 2021, at 10:45 AM,
wrote:
Hello-no worries.
Yes, I'm available today.
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 1:16 AM
To:
(NY) (FBI)
Cc:
(USANYS)
is
(NY) (FBI)
is
(NYPD)
V.
Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - Re: photo review/exhibit project
https://outlook.office365.us/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211025002.13
1/3
EFTA00014975

=== Page 2 ===
11/26/21, 7:17 PM
Mail
(NY) (FBI) - Outlook
Hi
Apologies that we didn't connect today- are you available tomorrow? If not, no worries, we can
find another time.
Thanks!
On Sep 15, 2021, at 11:42 AM,
wrote:
Hi
Absolutely,
filled me in a little bit. No problem at all.
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 9:02 PM
To:
is
(NY) (FBI)
(NY) (FBI)
>;
(NYPD)
Cc:
Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - RE: photo review/exhibit project
Thanks so much again for reviewing the photographs - we really appreciate it!! Our
paralegal
put together the attached spreadsheet, which reflects a subset of the
photographs you gave us from the photo review project. I believe it is 51 photographs
in total. We would like to confirm for each photo on the spreadsheet from what disk
or device the photo came from. Are you able to help with this? Can we find a few
minutes to chat about this project?
Thanks!
From:
Sent: Tuesday, August 3, 2021 10:06 AM
To:
(NY) (FBI)
v.
(NY)
(FBI)
Cc:
V.
(USANYS)
Subject: photo review/exhibit project
Hi
and
Hope everyone is doing well. Are you available for a call later this afternoon to discuss
a game plan for the photo review project we've talked about?
Thanks so much,
https://outlook.office365.us/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211025002.13
2/3
EFTA00014976

=== Page 3 ===
11/26/21, 7:17 PM
Mail
(NY) (FBI) - Outlook
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
New York, NY 10007
https://outlook.office365.us/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211025002.13
3/3
EFTA00014977


c1: EFTA00015347
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015347.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
,
(USANYS)"
Subject: Epstein
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 11:58:57 +0000
Importance: Normal
Another article in the NYT today. How are we putting down our marker?
Sent from my iPhone
EFTA00015347


c1: EFTA00015892
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015892.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
"
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
Cc:
(USANYS)"
Subject: Epstein
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 20:12:50 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: 2019-03-12,_JE,_status_memo_for_ODAG_updated.docx,NPA.pdf
- Attached is a copy of the memo we sent down about five weeks ago along with the NPA from the Florida
prosecution which is discussed in that memo.
We'll send you later this afternoon a memo with updates in our investigation since March.
EFTA00015892


c1: EFTA00015726
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015726.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 1 of 12
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
Plaintiff,
CASE NO:
V.
GHISLAINE MAXWELL,
Defendant.
/
COMPLAINT
Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP
(212) 446-2300
1
EFTA00015726

=== Page 2 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 2 of 12
Plaintiff,
formerly known as
"), for her Complaint against Defendant, GHISLAINE MAXWELL ("Maxwell"), avers
upon personal knowledge as to her own acts and status and otherwise upon information and
belief:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1.
This suit arises out of Defendant Maxwell's defamatory statements against
Plaintiff
As described below,
was a victim of sexual trafficking and abuse while
she was a minor child. Defendant Maxwell not only facilitated that sexual abuse but, most
recently, wrongfully subjected
to public ridicule, contempt and disgrace by, among other
things, calling
a liar in published statements with the malicious intent of discrediting and
further damaging
worldwide.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2.
This is an action for damages in an amount in excess of the minimum
jurisdictional limits of this Court.
3.
This Court has jurisdiction over this dispute pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332
(diversity jurisdiction) as
and Maxwell are citizens of different states and the amount in
controversy exceeds seventy-five thousand ($75,000), exclusive of interest and costs.
4.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over Maxwell. Maxwell resides in New York
City, and this action arose, and defamatory statements were made, within the Southern District of
New York.
5.
Venue is proper in this Court as the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of
this Court.
2
EFTA00015727

=== Page 3 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 3 of 12
PARTIES
6.
Plaintiff
is an individual who is a citizen of the State of Colorado.
7.
Defendant Maxwell, who is domiciled in the Southern District of New York, is
not a citizen of the state of Colorado.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
8.
became a victim of sex trafficking and repeated sexual abuse
after being recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein when
was under the age
of eighteen.
9.
Between 1999 and 2002, with the assistance and participation of Maxwell,
Epstein sexually abused
at numerous locations including his mansions in West Palm
Beach, Florida, and in this District. Between 2001 and 2007, with the assistance of numerous
co-conspirators, Epstein abused more than thirty (30) minor underage girls, a fact confirmed by
state and federal law enforcement.
10.
As part of their sex trafficking efforts, Epstein and Maxwell intimidated
into remaining silent about what had happened to her.
11.
In September 2007, Epstein entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA")
that barred his prosecution for numerous federal sex crimes in the Southern District of Florida.
12.
In the NPA, the United States additionally agreed that it would not institute any
federal criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein.
13.
As a co-conspirator of Epstein, Maxwell was consequently granted immunity in
the Southern District of Florida through the NPA.
14.
Epstein ultimately pled guilty to procuring a minor for prostitution, and is now a
registered sex offender.
3
EFTA00015728

=== Page 4 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 4 of 12
15.
Rather than confer with the victims about the NPA, the U.S. Attorney's Office
and Epstein agreed to a "confidentiality" provision in the Agreement barring its disclosure to
anyone-including Epstein's victims. As a consequence, the victims were not told about the
NPA.
16.
On July 7, 2008, a young woman identified as Jane Doe No. 1, one of Jeffrey
Epstein's victims (other than
), filed a petition to enforce her rights under the Crime
Victims' Rights Act ("CVRA"), 18 U.S.C. 1 3771, alleging that the Government failed to
provide her the rights promised in the CVRA with regard to the plea arrangement with Epstein.
The litigation remains ongoing.
17.
On or about May 4, 2009,
-identified then as Jane Doe No.
102-filed a complaint against Jeffrey Epstein in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Florida. The complaint included allegations made by
that pertained
to Maxwell.
18.
In pertinent part, the Jane Doe No. 102 complaint described in detail how
Maxwell recruited
(who was then a minor girl) to become a victim of sex trafficking by
introducing
to Jeffrey Epstein. With the assistance of Maxwell, Epstein was able to
sexually abuse
for years until
eventually escaped.
19.
The Jane Doe No. 102 complaint contained the first public allegations made on
behalf of
regarding Maxwell.
20.
As civil litigation against Epstein moved forward on behalf of
and many
other similarly-situated victims, Maxwell was served with a subpoena for deposition. Her
testimony was sought concerning her personal knowledge and role in Epstein's abuse of
and others.
4
EFTA00015729

=== Page 5 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 5 of 12
21.
To avoid her deposition, Maxwell claimed that her mother fell deathly ill and that
consequently she was leaving the United States for London with no plans of ever returning. In
fact, however, within weeks of using that excuse to avoid testifying, Maxwell had returned to
New York.
22.
In 2011, two FBI agents located
in Australia-where she had been hiding
from Epstein and Maxwell for several years-and arranged to meet with her at the U.S.
Consulate in Sidney.
provided truthful and accurate information to the FBI about
Epstein and Maxwell's sexual abuse.
23.
Ultimately, as a mother and one of Epstein's many victims,
believed that
she should speak out about her sexual abuse experiences in hopes of helping others who had also
suffered from sexual trafficking and abuse.
24.
On December 23, 2014,
incorporated an organization called Victims
Refuse Silence, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit corporation.
25.
intended Victims Refuse Silence to change and improve the fight against
sexual abuse and human trafficking. The goal of her organization was, and continues to be, to
help survivors surmount the shame, silence, and intimidation typically experienced by victims of
sexual abuse.
has now dedicated her professional life to helping victims of sex
trafficking.
26.
On December 30, 2014,
moved to join the on-going litigation previously
filed by Jane Doe 1 in the Southern District of Florida challenging Epstein's non-prosecution
agreement by filing her own joinder motion.
5
EFTA00015730

=== Page 6 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 6 of 12
27.
motion described Maxwell's role as one of the main women who
Epstein used to procure under-aged girls for sexual activities and a primary co-conspirator and
participant in his sexual abuse and sex trafficking scheme.
28.
In January, 2015, Maxwell undertook a concerted and malicious campaign to
discredit
and to so damage her reputation that
factual reporting of what had
happened to her would not be credited.
29.
As part of Maxwell's campaign she directed her agent, Ross Gow, to attack
honesty and truthfulness and to accuse
of lying.
30.
On or about January 3, 2015, speaking through her authorized agent, Maxwell
issued an additional false statement to the media and public designed to maliciously discredit
That statement contained the following deliberate falsehoods:
(a)
That
sworn allegations "against Ghislaine Maxwell are untrue."
(b)
That the allegations have been "shown to be untrue."
(c)
That
"claims are obvious lies."
31.
Maxwell's January 3, 2015, statement incorporated by reference "Ghislaine
Maxwell's original response to the lies and defamatory claims remains the same," an earlier
statement that had falsely described
factual assertions as "entirely false" and "entirely
untrue."
32.
Maxwell made the same false and defamatory statements as set forth above, in the
Southern District of New York and elsewhere in a deliberate effort to maliciously discredit
and silence her efforts to expose sex crimes committed around the world by Maxwell,
Epstein, and other powerful persons. Maxwell did so with the purpose and effect of having
6
EFTA00015731

=== Page 7 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 7 of 12
others repeat such false and defamatory statements and thereby further damaged
reputation.
33.
Maxwell made her statements to discredit
in close consultation with
Epstein. Maxwell made her statements knowing full well they were false.
34.
Maxwell made her statements maliciously as part of an effort to conceal sex
trafficking crimes committed around the world by Maxwell, Epstein and other powerful persons.
35.
Maxwell intended her false and defamatory statements set out above to be
broadcast around the world and to intimidate and silence
from making further efforts to
expose sex crimes committed by Maxwell, Epstein, and other powerful persons.
36.
Maxwell intended her false statements to be specific statements of fact, including
a statement that she had not recruited an underage
for Epstein's abuse. Maxwell's false
statements were broadcast around the world and were reasonably understood by those who heard
them to be specific factual claims by Maxwell that she had not helped Epstein recruit or sexually
abuse
and that
was a liar.
37.
On or about January 4, 2015, Maxwell continued her campaign to falsely and
maliciously discredit
When a reporter on a Manhattan street asked Maxwell about
allegations against Maxwell, she responded by saying: "I am referring to the statement
that we made." The New York Daily News published a video of this response by Maxwell
indicating that she made her false statements on East 65th Street in Manhattan, New York, within
the Southern District of New York.
7
EFTA00015732

=== Page 8 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 8 of 12
COUNT I
DEFAMATION
1.
Plaintiff
re-alleges paragraphs 1 - 37 as if the same were fully set forth
herein. Maxwell made her false and defamatory statements deliberately and maliciously with the
intent to intimidate, discredit and defame
2.
In January 2015, and thereafter, Maxwell intentionally and maliciously released to
the press her false statements about
in an attempt to destroy
reputation and
cause her to lose all credibility in her efforts to help victims of sex trafficking.
3.
Maxwell additionally released to the press her false statements with knowledge
that her words would dilute, discredit and neutralize
public and private messages to
sexual abuse victims and ultimately prevent
from effectively providing assistance and
advocacy on behalf of other victims of sex trafficking, or to expose her abusers.
4.
Using her role as a powerful figure with powerful friends, Maxwell's statements
were published internationally for the malicious purpose of further damaging a sexual abuse and
sexual trafficking victim; to destroy
reputation and credibility; to cause the world to
disbelieve
; and to destroy
efforts to use her experience to help others suffering
as sex trafficking victims.
5.
Maxwell, personally and through her authorized agent, Ross Gow, intentionally
and maliciously made false and damaging statements of fact concerning
as detailed
,
above, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere.
6.
The false statements made by Gow were all made by him as Maxwell's
authorized agent and were made with direct and actual authority from Maxwell as the principal.
8
EFTA00015733

=== Page 9 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 9 of 12
7.
The false statements that Maxwell made personally, and through her authorized
agent Gow, not only called
truthfulness and integrity into question, but also exposed
to public hatred, contempt, ridicule, and disgrace.
8.
Maxwell made her false statements knowing full well that they were completely
false. Accordingly, she made her statements with actual and deliberate malice, the highest
degree of awareness of falsity.
9.
Maxwell's false statements constitute libel, as she knew that they were going to
be transmitted in writing, widely disseminated on the internet and in print. Maxwell intended her
false statements to be published by newspaper and other media outlets internationally, and they
were, in fact, published globally, including within the Southern District of New York.
10.
Maxwell's false statements constitute libel per se inasmuch as they exposed
to public contempt, ridicule, aversion, and disgrace, and induced an evil opinion of her in
the minds of right-thinking persons.
11.
Maxwell's false statements also constitute libel per se inasmuch as they tended to
injure
in her professional capacity as the president of a non-profit corporation designed
to help victims of sex trafficking, and inasmuch as they destroyed her credibility and reputation
among members of the community that seeks her help and that she seeks to serve.
12.
Maxwell's false statements directly stated and also implied that in speaking out
against sex trafficking
acted with fraud, dishonesty, and unfitness for the task.
Maxwell's false statements directly and indirectly indicate that
lied about being recruited
by Maxwell and sexually abused by Epstein and Maxwell. Maxwell's false statements were
reasonably understood by many persons who read her statements as conveying that specific
intention and meaning.
9
EFTA00015734

=== Page 10 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 10 of 12
13.
Maxwell's false statements were reasonably understood by many persons who
read those statements as making specific factual claims that
was lying about specific
facts.
14.
Maxwell specifically directed her false statements at
true public
description of factual events, and many persons who read Maxwell's statements reasonably
understood that those statements referred directly to
account of her life as a young
teenager with Maxwell and Epstein.
15.
Maxwell intended her false statements to be widely published and disseminated
on television, through newspapers, by word of mouth and on the internet. As intended by
Maxwell, her statements were published and disseminated around the world.
16.
Maxwell coordinated her false statements with other media efforts made by
Epstein and other powerful persons acting as Epstein's representatives and surrogates. Maxwell
made and coordinated her statements in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere with
the specific intent to amplify the defamatory effect those statements would have on
reputation and credibility.
17.
Maxwell made her false statements both directly and through agents who, with
her general and specific authorization, adopted, distributed, and published the false statements on
Maxwell's behalf. In addition, Maxwell and her authorized agents made false statements in
reckless disregard of their truth or falsity and with malicious intent to destroy
reputation and credibility; to prevent her from further disseminating her life story; and to cause
persons hearing or reading
descriptions of truthful facts to disbelieve her entirely.
Maxwell made her false statements wantonly and with the specific intent to maliciously damage
good name and reputation in a way that would destroy her efforts to administer her
10
EFTA00015735

=== Page 11 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 11 of 12
non-profit foundation, or share her life story, and thereby help others who have suffered from
sexual abuse.
18.
As a result of Maxwell's campaign to spread false, discrediting and defamatory
statements about
,
suffered substantial damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
19.
Maxwell's false statements have caused, and continue to cause,
economic
damage, psychological pain and suffering, mental anguish and emotional distress, and other
direct and consequential damages and losses.
20.
Maxwell's campaign to spread her false statements internationally was unusual
and particularly egregious conduct. Maxwell sexually abused
and helped Epstein to
sexually abuse
,
and then, in order to avoid having these crimes discovered, Maxwell
wantonly and maliciously set out to falsely accuse, defame, and discredit
In so doing,
Maxwell's efforts constituted a public wrong by deterring, damaging, and setting back
efforts to help victims of sex trafficking. Accordingly, this is a case in which exemplary and
punitive damages are appropriate.
21.
Punitive and exemplary damages are necessary in this case to deter Maxwell and
others from wantonly and maliciously using a campaign of lies to discredit
and other
victims of sex trafficking.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff
respectfully requests judgment against Defendant
Maxwell, awarding compensatory, consequential, exemplary, and punitive damages in an
amount to be determined at trial, but in excess of the $75,000 jurisdictional requirement; costs of
suit; attorneys' fees; and such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
11
EFTA00015736

=== Page 12 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1 Filed 09/21/15 Page 12 of 12
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all causes of action asserted within this
pleading.
Dated September 21, 2015.
/s/ David Boies
David Boies
Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP
/s/ Sigrid McCawley
Sigrid McCawley
(Pro Hac Vice Pending)
Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP
/s/ Ellen Brockman
Ellen Brockman
Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP
12
EFTA00015737


c1: EFTA00015081
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015081.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
10/6/21, 4:59 PM
Repository Inquiry
New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services
Alfred E. Smith Building, 80 South Swan St.
Albany, New York 12210. Tel:1-800-262-DCJS
Michael C.Green, Executive Deputy Commissioner of the NYS Division of Criminal Justice Services
Identification Summary Criminal History Job/License Wanted Missing
Attention - Important Information
* See Additional Information at the bottom of this response for more banners pertaining to the criminal history
Identification Information
III Status: Status in other states unknown
NYS Criminal History Information
There is no Criminal History/Releasable Criminal History information associated with this NYSID.
Other History Related Information
There is no Other History Related Information associated with this history.
Job/License Information
1/2
EFTA00015081

=== Page 2 ===
10/6/21, 4:59 PM
Civil Information
Wanted Information
There is no NYS Wanted Information associated with this history.
Missing Person Information
There is no NYS Missing Information associated with this history.
Additional Information
Caution: Identification not based on fingerprint comparison. This record was produced as the result of an
inquiry.
According to our files, this individual does not appear to have History in III. However this does not
preclude the possibility that the FBI does have a record. If you desire this information, please submit a
request directly to the FBI.
WARNING: Release of any of the information presented in this computerized Case History to unauthorized
individuals or agencies is prohibited by federal law TITLE 42 USC 3789g(b).
This report is to be used for this one specific purpose as described in the Use and Dissemination Agreement
your agency has on file with DCJS. Destroy after use and request an updated rap sheet for subsequent needs.
All information presented herein is as complete as the data furnished to DCJS.
2/2
EFTA00015082


c1: EFTA00014166
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014166.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USAFLS)"
To:
(FBI)"
Bcc:
"
(USAFLS)"
Subject: Meeting today
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:21:30 +0000
Importance: Normal
Hi
- I am going to work on my presentation outline here at home. When I have it put together I will give
you a call and we can go over it by phone, if that is okay with you.
P.S. Goldberger accepted the proposed change to the plea agreement, so it looks like the plea is probably going
forward tomorrow unless Mr. Epstein changes his mind.
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Fax
EFTA00014166


c1: EFTA00014458
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014458.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
)"
Cc:
(USANYS)"
Subject: WaPo; US: Once-secret Jeffrey Epstein sex offender deal must stand
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:31:01 +0000
Importance: Normal
You've prob seen this, but anyway:
US: Once-secret Jeffrey Epstein
sex offender deal must stand
By Curt Anderson
I
AP
June 25 at 10:23 AM
MIAMI - Federal prosecutors say a once-secret plea deal reached over a decade
ago with wealthy convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein must stand, despite
objections from many of his victims.
Prosecutors said in a new court filing that a violation of the Crime Victims' Rights
Act does not allow for the agreement to be voided.
Some of the victims claim it should be thrown out at least partially, because they
were not consulted as required.
Now it's up to a federal judge to decide what to do.
The 2008 deal ended a federal investigation. It allowed Epstein to plead guilty to
lesser state charges that resulted in a 13-month jail sentence. It also required
financial settlements to dozens of his once-teenage victims and that he register as
a sex offender.
Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not
be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
EFTA00014458

=== Page 2 ===
Public Affairs
United States Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney's Office I Southern District of New York
EFTA00014459


c1: EFTA00016809
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016809.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
,
(USANYS)
[Contractor]"
Subject: Fwd: Andrew claims he hasn't been approached
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 22:53:14 +0000
Attachments: attachment_1.pdf; ATT00001.htm
FYI. Andrew saying he hasn't been contacted.
EFTA00016809


c1: EFTA00017702
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00017702.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject: FW: Victim - JEFFREY EPSTEIN - Case
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 16:50:19 +0000
Per our practice of passing along potential witness information to the FBI, please see the below email.
Thanks.
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
1 St. Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
From:
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2020 12:35 PM
Subject: FW: Victim - JEFFREY EPSTEIN - Case
For you.
From:
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2020 12:32 PM
To:
Subject: Victim - JEFFREY EPSTEIN - Case
I have written regarding Jeffrey Epstein Case. I am a victim. I am a witness. I request Audrey Strauss to allow me speak.
My Name
Whatsapp
Facebook
I am a Healthy Person. I want to visit the court to speak about Jeffrey Epstein case.
EFTA00017702


c1: EFTA00016284
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016284.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
)"
Subject: RE: Epstein Victims
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 21:51:05 +0000
Yes, I think this is about the OPR meeting to announce the results of their investigation.
From:
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 5:04 PM
To:
Subject: FW: Epstein Victims
Do you know what this is about?
From:
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 4:36 PM
To:
is
;
Subject: FW: Epstein Victims
Just wanted to let you know about this invite.
From:
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2020 4:12 PM
To:
Subject: Epstein Victims
I obtained your name and contact information from
He advised you are the V/W
Coordinator working with the Epstein victims. Are you available for a telephone call tomorrow afternoon
with myself,
The call is scheduled from 3:30-4:30 p.m. If you are
available, I will send a calendar invite.
Thanks,
Associate Deputy Attorney General &
National Coordinator for Child Exploitation & Human Trafficking
U.S. Department of Justice
EFTA00016284


c1: EFTA00015844
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015844.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - RE: Epstein Evidence status
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 23:20:27 +0000
Great, thanks. And yeah if on Monday you could please double-check both the spreadsheet question and the blank files,
that would be great so we can close the loop on our end. Thanks again, and have a good weekend.
From:
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2020 15:09
To:
Cc:
is
is
is
is
is
is
Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - RE: Epstein Evidence status
I don't have the evidence in front of me, but it is probably accurate. It is not unusual for the software to find such
files. I will review Monday to make sure. As to your questions from last night, the sheet should be
comprehensive. I only recall 1 addition, but I am sure that what I have is reflected in the sheet. As for the items
in dark grey, there are 2 servers with multiple drives. Some of those drives have physically failed. We have to get
them to one of our HQ specialists for recovery. Since they are physically broken, data recovery may or may not
be possible. It can be a very long process. We will get that moving ASAP. Need anything else, let me know.
On Jul 24, 2020 2:20 PM,
wrote:
In addition to the pending questions below, we've been advised by the vendor that is reviewing the initial seven devices
(that were provided on a per-device extraction basis, as previously discussed) that those materials include approximately
71,000 documents that are zero bytes (i.e., empty files). They are listed in the attached spreadsheet.
Is that accurate? Or does that reflect some issue with the extraction process?
thanks,
EFTA00015844

=== Page 2 ===
From:
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 18:08
To:
Cc:
is
V.
is
in
Subject: RE: Epstein Evidence status
This is very helpful, thank you. Comparing this to the prior spreadsheet, and leaving aside the "Nothing for Southern"
designations as well as the NYC numbers that look like they're for the desktops that held the actual drives we're looking at
(such as NYC024385, 387, 389, 391, and 393, and NYC027909), I think there are just three additional devices listed here
that weren't on the spreadsheet you previously sent. I have those as:
1. NYC024328 (row 10)
2. NYC024367 (row 62)
3. NYC027910 (row 96)
Could you please confirm that I have those additions correct, and that I'm not missing any? And it looks like all of those
were included in the drive you provided today.
I also see there are some drives that are still being processed, including NYC024376 through 380 and several drives in
NYC024395 - could you please let us know what that means?
Thanks very much, and we'll circle back if any issues with anything we received today, which should get to
in the
next day or two.
thanks again,
Original Message
From:
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 14:44
To:
Cc:
i
Subject: Epstein Evidence status
Here is the up to date spreadsheet. I color coded things to hopefully make it easier. There are 5 items I have to
get you (as we discussed this morning) Those should take another day or 2, so looking at Monday/Tuesday for that. Any
questions, let me know.
EFTA00015845


c1: EFTA00015895
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015895.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
(USANYS)"
Subject: RE: Epstein/Maxwell
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 21:12:20 +0000
Sure, that makes sense. I haven't. If we get it tonight, maybe, but Monday would probably also be ok.
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 5:10 PM
To:
(USANYS)
Subject: FW: Epstein/Maxwell
Hmm. Seems like may be we should reach out in the first instance given that it's the crim div chief?
Also, team never responded on the draft of the letter. Have you heard anything from them? I don't think there's any way
we get it filed by Friday at this point, but I suppose there is no magic to that date.
From:
(ODAG)
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 5:08 PM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
(USANYS)
Subject: RE: Epstein/Maxwell
,
Thanks again for all of the valuable information you provided this morning. I will keep you informed as
we finalize plans for the victim meeting.
As for your request, you should reach out to
in the SDFL. Ms.
is the Criminal
Chief and is prepared to assist you in locating all criminal files still located in the District. She can be
reached at
or
She is awaiting your reach out. Please let me
know if I can be of further assistance.
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 12:03 PM
To:
(ODAG)
Cc:
(USANYS)
Subject: RE: Epstein/Maxwell
- Thanks again for your help on this a few weeks ago. We've since had a number of productive conversations with
the folks at OPR you pointed us to, and we think it would be helpful to also make contact with someone at SDFL purely for
the purpose of ascertaining what hard-copy materials they still have related to the case down there and how we could
best arrange to obtain and review copies. We have had very limited contact with
an AUSA in the SDFL civil
division who we understand was the primary point of contact on issues related to the CVRA litigation. Do you know, does
he remain the best point of contact for the issues we hope to discuss, or is there someone else in that office we should
reach out to?
EFTA00015895

=== Page 2 ===
Thanks so much,
From:
(ODAG)
>
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 2:33 PM
To:
(USANYS)
is
(ODAG)
Cc:
(USANYS)
Subject: RE: Epstein/Maxwell
Thursday at noon is perfect. Should I give you a call?
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 1:39 PM
To:
(ODAG)
is
(ODAG)
^
Cc:
(USANYS)
Subject: RE: Epstein/Maxwell
Thanks,
Would 12pm tomorrow (Thursday) work for you? If not, we also have availability Friday morning, from
10-12:30 if anything in there works for you. Best,
From:
(ODAG)
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 1:03 PM
To:
(ODAG)
is
(USANYS)
Cc:
(USANYS)
Subject: RE: Epstein/Maxwell
Hi
,
I'm happy to assist you. I'm available Thursday or Friday to discuss what documents you are trying to
locate. Please let me know if you have availability on either of those days.
Thanks,
From:
(ODAG)
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 12:49 PM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
(USANYS)
is
(ODAG)
Subject: RE: Epstein/Maxwell
Thanks. OPR and
may have a better sense on document custodians than do I.
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 12:41 PM
To:
(ODAG)
Cc:
(USANYS)
>;
(ODAG)
Subject: RE: Epstein/Maxwell
EFTA00015896

=== Page 3 ===
Thanks,
Among our questions was who, whether at ODAG, SDFL, or NDGA we should be in touch with at this point
regarding documents. I also know OPR did a significant document collection last year.
We will reach back to OPR, but if there is a particular point of contact at SDFL or NDGA on issues related to document
collection, in particular, please let us know. And if a call on those issues would be helpful, happy to set one up.
Thanks very much,
From:
(ODAG)
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2020 10:56 AM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
(USANYS)
>;
(ODAG)
Subject: RE: Epstein/Maxwell
Happy to talk, but my only real role related to recusal issues and consequences. Now that the CVRA litigation is over, you
probably are best going directly to SDFL, as I don't have any of their documents. Thanks,
Associate Deputy Attorney General
Office:
Cell:
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2020 6:23 PM
To:
(ODAG)
Cc:
(USANYS)
Subject: Epstein/Maxwell
- Hope all is well. We had spoken last summer, after the Epstein case was charged, about some potential
document/discovery requests related to the SDFL investigation and the NPA, in particular. Those conversations were
largely at mooted at the time by Epstein's death, but as I'm sure you know, we've recently charged Ghislaine Maxwell and,
anticipating potentially similar issues, we were hoping to revisit those conversations. Do you have time later this week
for a quick call? If so, please let us know what might work for you.
Thanks very much,
Chief, Public Corruption Unit
U.S. Attorney's Office for the
Southern District of New York
Tel.
EFTA00015897


c1: EFTA00014972
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014972.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
11/26/21, 7:18 PM
Mail
(NY) (FBI) Outlook
RE: photo project
>
Thu 9/30/2021 4:31 PM
To:
Cc:
1 attachments (31 KB)
Photos for Trial Prep with Location Info.xlsx;
Hi
The photo sourcing project is completed and attached.
I added 3 columns: Evidence Item #, Name of CD and Location of Item.
Thanks,
From:
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2021 6:26 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - photo project
Hi
Just checking in on the photo sourcing project. Do you think you'll be able to send us that spreadsheet in the next
few days?
Thanks so much for helping with this.
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
New York, NY 10007
https://outlook.office365.us/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211025002.13
1/1
EFTA00014972


c1: EFTA00014500
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014500.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 62 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 39-1 Filed 03/02/16 Page 2 of 7
United States District Court
Southern District Of New York
X
Plaintiff,
DATE FILES
3/18/16
v.
15-cv-07433-RWS
Ghislaine Maxwell,
Defendant.
x
PROTECTIVE ORDER
Upon a showing of good cause in support of the entry of a protective order to
protect the discovery and dissemination of confidential information or information which
will improperly annoy, embarrass, or oppress any party, witness, or person providing
discovery in this case, IT IS ORDERED:
1.
This Protective Order shall apply to all documents, materials, and information,
including without limitation, documents produced, answers to interrogatories,
responses to requests for admission, deposition testimony, and other
information disclosed pursuant to the disclosure or discovery duties created by
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
2.
As used in this Protective Order, "document" is defined as provided in
FED.R.CIV.P. 34(a). A draft or non-identical copy is a separate document
within the meaning of this term.
EFTA00014500

=== Page 2 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 62 Filed 03/18/16 Page 2 of 6
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 39-1 Filed 03/02/16 Page 3 of 7
3.
Information designated "CONFIDENTIAL" shall be information that is
confidential and implicates common law and statutory privacy interests of (a)
plaintiff
and (b) defendant Ghislaine Maxwell.
4.
CONFIDENTIAL information shall not be disclosed or used for any purpose
except the preparation and trial of this case.
5.
CONFIDENTIAL documents, materials, and/or information (collectively
"CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION") shall not, without the consent of the
party producing it or further Order of the Court, be disclosed except that such
information may be disclosed to:
a. attorneys actively working on this case;
b. persons regularly employed or associated with the attorneys actively
working on this case whose assistance is required by said attorneys in the
preparation for trial, at trial, or at other proceedings in this case;
c. the parties;
d. expert witnesses and consultants retained in connection with this
proceeding, to the extent such disclosure is necessary for preparation, trial
or other proceedings in this case;
e. the Court and its employees ("Court Personnel") in this case;
f. stenographic reporters who are engaged in proceedings necessarily incident
to the conduct of this action;
g. deponents, witnesses, or potential witnesses; and
2
EFTA00014501

=== Page 3 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 62 Filed 03/18/16 Page 3 of 6
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 39-1 Filed 03/02/16 Page 4 of 7
h. other persons by written agreement of the parties.
6.
Prior to disclosing any CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION to any person
listed above (other than counsel, persons employed by counsel, Court
Personnel and stenographic reporters), counsel shall provide such person with
a copy of this Protective Order and obtain from such person a written
acknowledgment stating that he or she has read this Protective Order and
agrees to be bound by its provisions. All such acknowledgments shall be
retained by counsel and shall be subject to in camera review by the Court if
good cause for review is demonstrated by opposing counsel.
7.
Documents are designated as CONFIDENTIAL by placing or affixing on them
(in a manner that will not interfere with their legibility) the following or other
appropriate notice: "CONFIDENTIAL." Discovery material designated
CONFIDENTIAL shall be identified by Bates number. To the extent practical,
the respective legend shall be placed near the Bates number.
8.
Designation of a document as CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION shall
constitute a representation that such document has been reviewed by an
attorney for the designating party, that there is a valid and good faith basis for
such designation, made at the time of disclosure or production to the receiving
party, and that disclosure of such information to persons other than those
permitted access to such material would cause a privacy harm to the
designating party.
3
EFTA00014502

=== Page 4 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 62 Filed 03/18/16 Page 4 of 6
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 39-1 Filed 03/02/16 Page 5 of 7
9.
Whenever a deposition involves the disclosure of CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION, the deposition or portions thereof shall be designated as
CONFIDENTIAL and shall be subject to the provisions of this Protective
Order. Such designation shall be made on the record during the deposition
whenever possible, but a party may designate portions of depositions as
CONFIDENTIAL after transcription, provided written notice of the
designation is promptly given to all counsel of record within thirty (30) days
after notice by the court reporter of the completion of the transcript, and until
the expiration of such thirty (30) days after notice by the court reporter of the
completion of the transcript, no party or counsel for any such party may share
the contents of the deposition outside the limitations of this Protective Order.
10.
Whenever a party seeks to file any document or material containing
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION with the Court in this matter, it shall be
accompanied by a Motion to Seal pursuant to Section 6.2 of the Electronic
Case Filing Rules & Instructions for the Southern District of New York.
11.
A party may object to the designation of particular CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION by giving written notice to the party designating the disputed
information. The written notice shall identify the information to which the
objection is made. If the parties cannot resolve the objection within ten (10)
business days after the time the notice is received, it shall be the obligation of
the party designating the information as CONFIDENTIAL to file an
4
EFTA00014503

=== Page 5 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 62 Filed 03/18/16 Page 5 of 6
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 39-1 Filed 03/02/16 Page 6 of 7
appropriate motion requesting that the Court determine whether the disputed
information should be subject to the terms of this Protective Order. If such a
motion is timely filed, the disputed information shall be treated as
CONFIDENTIAL under the terms of this Protective Order until the Court rules
on the motion. If the designating party fails to file such a motion within the
prescribed time, the disputed information shall lose its designation as
CONFIDENTIAL and shall not thereafter be treated as CONFIDENTIAL in
accordance with this Protective Order. In connection with a motion filed under
this provision, the party designating the information as CONFIDENTIAL shall
bear the burden of establishing that good cause exists for the disputed
information to be treated as CONFIDENTIAL.
12.
At the conclusion of this case, unless other arrangements are agreed upon, each
document and all copies thereof which have been designated as
CONFIDENTIAL shall be returned to the party that designated it
CONFIDENTIAL, or the parties may elect to destroy CONFIDENTIAL
documents. Where the parties agree to destroy CONFIDENTIAL documents,
the destroying party shall provide all parties with an affidavit confirming the
destruction.
13. This Protective Order shall have no force and effect on the use of any
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION at trial in this matter.
5
EFTA00014504

=== Page 6 ===
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 62 Filed 03/18/16 Page 6 of 6
Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS Document 39-1 Filed 03/02/16 Page 7 of 7
14.
This Protective Order may be modified by the Court at any time for good cause
shown following notice to all parties and an opportunity for them to be heard.
Grout BY THE COURT
UNITED/STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3-17-16
6
EFTA00014505


c1: EFTA00017074
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00017074.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Case
1067
Page
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Virginia L. Giuffre,
Plaintiff,
V.
Case No.: 15-cv-07433-RWS
Ghislaine Maxwell,
Defendant.
INTERVENORS' JULIE BROWN AND MIAMI HERALD MEDIA CO.'S
RESPONSE TO MAXWELL'S OBJECTIONS TO UNSEALING
Sanford L. Bohrer
Christine N. Walz
31 West 52nd Street
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: 212.513.3200
Fax: 212.385.9010
Attorneys for Intervenors
Julie Brown and Miami Herald Media Company
EFTA00017074

=== Page 2 ===
10
Pursuant to this Court's Order and protocol for Unsealing Decided Motions, Intervenors
Julie Brown and Miami Herald Media Co. ("Miami Herald") respectfully submit this response to
Ms. Maxwell's Memorandum Brief in Support of Her Objections to Unsealing Sealed Materials
(Dkt. 1057) ("the Objections").
ARGUMENT
Ms. Maxwell's objections to the unsealing of Dkt. Entries 143, 164, 172, 199, and 230 (and
related submissions) are entirely without merit, and these documents should be unsealed in their
entirety. The objections mischaracterize the governing law, including the Second Circuit's ruling
in Brown V. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41 (2d. Cir. 2019); rely upon general "alleged countervailing
interests" against disclosure that are not supported by the extensive body of case law addressing
whether a judicial document may be sealed by the Court; and assert unsubstantiated, generalized,
and speculative harms based on the alleged countervailing interests that are insufficient to
outweigh the presumption of access to these judicial documents.
As set forth in detail below, there is no basis identified in the Objections for the Court to
continue sealing Dkt. Entries 143, 164, 172, 199, and 230 (and related docket entries identified by
Ms. Maxwell).
I.
Ms. Maxwell Mischaracterizes Brown V. Maxwell.
Ms. Maxwell's filing selectively quotes from the Second Circuit's ruling in Brown V.
Maxwell in an attempt to minimize the right of access that attaches to all judicial documents.
Maxwell's repeated assertion that these documents are entitled to "a minimal presumption of
access" is directly contradicted by the Second Circuit's conclusion that "the presumption of access
to "materials submitted in connection with, and relevant to, discovery motions, motions in limine,
1 Counsel for Intervenors has not seen these documents and submits this response based on the list
of Decided Motions prepared by counsel for the Parties and Ms. Maxwell's Objections.
EFTA00017075

=== Page 3 ===
10
and other non-dispositive motions" is "substantial." Brown V. Maxwell, 929 F.3d at 53 (2d. Cir.
2019).
It is also well-established that the party requesting that documents remain sealed bears the
heavy burden of demonstrating that there are compelling competing factors that outweigh the
presumption of access that attaches to each of the judicial documents at issue here. See Delta Air
Lines, Inc. V. Bombardier, Inc., No. 1:20-CV-3025-GHW, 2020 WL 2614704, at *4 (S.D.N.Y.
May 22, 2020); Bernsten V. O'Reilly, 307 F. Supp. 3d 161, 168 (S.D.N.Y. 2018); Lytle V.
JPMorgan Chase, 810 F. Supp. 2d 616, 621-22 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). Those factors and the harm of
disclosure must be identified with specificity. Lytle, 810 F. Supp. 2d at 621-22. None of Ms.
Maxwell's Objections meets this heavy burden.
II.
Ms. Maxwell's General Objections Are Without Merit.
Ms. Maxwell asserts objections based on alleged "countervailing interests" that are not
recognized in the extensive body of case law addressing whether a judicial document may be
sealed by the Court.
A.
Reliance on a Protective Order By a Party or Non-Party
Ms. Maxwell argues that, if a party or non-party relies on a protective order or sealing order
and provides information in discovery, the information must remain sealed. This is incorrect.
First, courts in this Circuit have routinely ordered unsealing of documents in cases with
protective orders or confidentiality provisions. See, e.g., Gambale V. Deutsche Bank AG, 377 F.3d
133, 143 (2d Cir. 2004) (unsealing judicial document despite party's claim that it had settled claim
to "avoid public disclosure at trial of the temporarily sealed documents"); Bernsten V. O'Reilly,
307 F. Supp. 3d 161 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) (unsealing documents submitted in support of motion to
compel arbitration despite parties' agreement to file them under seal); Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. V.
Wales LLC, 993 F.Supp.2d 409, 414 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (holding the fact that the agreement
2
EFTA00017076

=== Page 4 ===
10
"contains a confidentiality clause is not binding here, given the public's right of access to "judicial
documents'").² Courts do so, recognizing that "[t]he presumption of public access would become
virtually meaningless if it could be overcome by the mutual interest of the parties..." Wolinsky V.
Scholastic Inc., 900 F.Supp.2d 332, 334 (S.D.N.Y. 2012).
And second, here, the plain terms of the Protective Order do not support Maxwell's reliance
argument. The Protective Order at issue specifically provided that it would "have no force and
effect on the use of any CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION at trial." Dkt. 39-1, at 6. Therefore,
the Protective Order contemplated certain information becoming public at trial, and any party's
reliance on the Protective Order to prevent all sensitive information from becoming public is
unfounded.
B.
Prevention of the Abuse of Court Records and Files
Ms. Maxwell again mischaracterizes Brown V. Maxwell in stating that the Court should use
sealing orders to prevent abuse of court records and files. In Brown V. Maxwell, the Second
Circuit's instruction that courts should manage their dockets to ensure that court filings are not
abused was made in the context of providing alternatives to sealing, which the Court noted are
"often preferable" to sealing, including "explaining on the record that the statements appear to lack
credibility" and striking from the record materials that are "redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or
2 The case relied on by Maxwell is not to the contrary. Instead, Martindell V. Int'l Tel. & Tel.
Corp., 594 F.2d 291, 297 (2d Cir. 1979), addresses only whether reliance on a valid protective
order may be a considered as a countervailing interest to disclosure. But here, the Second Circuit
has already held that the protective order was not valid, as implemented. See Brown V. Maxwell,
929 F.3d 41 (2d. Cir. 2019). Therefore, Martindell is not applicable. Further, in later cases, the
Second Circuit limited Martindell's ruling to cases involving documents that were not "judicial
documents" subject to a presumption of access. See United States V. Amodeo, 44 F.3d 141 (2d Cir.
1995).
3
EFTA00017077

=== Page 5 ===
10
scandalous." Brown, 929 F.3d at 49 n.28, 51-52. Ms. Maxwell's argument, here, turns that
reasoning on its head.
Ms. Maxwell also provides no basis for her conclusory statements that the documents at
issue were "abusively filed" court records and files.
C.
Annoyance, Embarrassment, Oppression, and Undue Burden
Rule 26 allows protective orders to issue that allow the sealing of materials upon a showing
of good cause that they are likely to cause annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue
burden. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26; Brown, 929 F.3d at 51.
Simply stating that questions were "intrusive" or "embarrassing," however, is insufficient
to meet the good cause standard of Rule 26, especially when the allegations at issue in the litigation
concern the sexual abuse of young girls at the hands of the wealthy and powerful. Framing
allegations of sexual abuse as "private" protects perpetrators at the expense of victims. The Miami
Herald's coverage of Mr. Epstein's and his associates' alleged crimes has nothing to do with
consensual sexual preferences and everything to do with the abuse of young girls, whether that
crime was justly prosecuted or, instead, whether it was quietly dispensed with by the legal system
to protect the reputations of well-connected adults. This is not information that could be
reasonably characterized as exposing Ms. Maxwell to "annoyance" or "embarrassment" in a way
that could support continued sealing under the good cause standard of Rule 26.
D.
Rights of Suspects Under Criminal Investigation
Ms. Maxwell also claims that the mere existence of criminal investigations into Mr. Epstein
and his associates' conduct warrants the sealing of materials because it is "unclear who are
witnesses or targets of any investigation." Dkt. 1057, at 6. The cases she relies on stand for the
general proposition that documents may sometimes be sealed to protect the integrity of criminal
4
EFTA00017078

=== Page 6 ===
10
investigations. See United States V. Longueuil, 567 F.App'x 13, 16 (2d Cir. 2014) (finding it was
not an abuse of discretion to allow continued sealing of discovery materials that were not judicial
documents and that reflected sensitive information about cooperating witnesses and the
government's investigative methods and techniques); Hardy V. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of
United States, 697 F. App'x 723, 725 (2d Cir. 2017) (noting generally that protection of ongoing
investigations and safety of witnesses may be countervailing interests).
However, Ms. Maxwell's generalized assertion that there are ongoing criminal
investigations is wholly insufficient to warrant sealing. See United States V. Huntley, 943 F. Supp.
2d 383, 387 (E.D.N.Y. 2013) (denying request to seal in high-profile case and noting "[t]here will
be no surprises to the potentially accused by the revelations of their names. Interference with
ongoing investigations will be of almost no significance."). Further, it is completely unreasonable
to allow Ms. Maxwell - a potential target of investigations - to assert this as a "countervailing
interest" under the circumstances. This would lead to an absurd result in which court documents
that could shed light on how Mr. Epstein's alleged crimes were kept secret for so long would be
sealed to protect the perpetrators at the expense of victims and the public.
E.
Improper Submission of Documents
Ms. Maxwell contends that documents submitted for a "non-merits purpose" should remain
sealed or redacted if there is any interest in sealing or redaction. The case she cites, SEC V.
TheStreet.com, 273 F.3d 222 (2d Cir. 2001), does not support this argument, nor are Intervenors
aware of any case supporting this position. This position is directly in conflict with Brown V.
Maxwell.
5
EFTA00017079

=== Page 7 ===
Case
10
All of the documents at issue appear to have been submitted to the Court for purposes of
an adjudication call upon the court to exercise its Article III powers and are judicial documents.
Ms. Maxwell's arguments to the contrary are wholly unsupported.
F.
Untrustworthy, Unreliable, and Incorrect Information
Ms. Maxwell contends that material submitted to the court should not be unsealed because
it is untrustworthy, unreliable, and incorrect. Again, Ms. Maxwell offers little support for those
conclusions, relying on hearsay requirements found in the Federal Rules of Evidence. This
argument conflates the admissibility requirements and sealing requirements. See Burton V.
Zwicker & Assocs., No. CV 10-227-WOB-JGW, 2012 WL 12925759, at *1 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 24,
2012) ("[D]efendant cites no authority-nor has the Court independently located any-which
supports the sealing of documents based upon alleged evidentiary problems."); Krause V. Rhodes,
535 F. Supp. 338, 354 (N.D. Ohio 1979), aff'd, 671 F.2d 212 (6th Cir. 1982) ("It is not a ground
for a protective order as suggested by deponents' counsel, that the depositions contain hearsay
answers or answers whose relevancy or competency might be suspect. The test of the propriety of
a discovery deposition question or answer is not admissibility at trial, nor is admissibility at trial
the test for entry of the depositions into the public domain.").
3 Additionally, Ms. Maxwell's reference to issues that were briefed in various undecided motions
in limine put those motions at issue. Therefore, under the Court's January 13, 2020 Order, these
motions should also be unsealed. See Dkt. 1018.
4 While Ms. Maxwell is correct that the Amodeo II court allowed some portions of a report
containing hearsay to be sealed, it did so on the basis of specific assertions regarding the material,
rather than the generalized assertions Ms. Maxwell offers.
6
EFTA00017080

=== Page 8 ===
10
III.
The Specific Objections for Each of the Documents at Issue Also Do Not Justify
Sealing.
Notwithstanding the 17-page brief submitted by Maxwell, she has failed to identify with
the required specificity any countervailing interest sufficient to overcome the substantial
presumption of access. Instead, Maxwell repeatedly cites generalized concerns and asks the Court
to broadly continue to seal entire documents based on those generalized concerns. These alleged
"countervailing interests" are wholly insufficient to support the continued sealing of documents in
this case. See New York V. Actavis, PLC, No. 14 CIV. 7473, 2014 WL 5353774, at *3 (S.D.N.Y.
Oct. 21, 2014) (citing Lugosch, 435 F.3d at 124) (decisions to seal must be supported by "specific,
on-the-record findings that sealing is necessary to preserve higher values and only if the sealing
order is narrowly tailored to achieve that aim").
A.
Dkt. 143 and Related Submissions
Ms. Maxwell contends that these pleadings all concern Plaintiff's attempt to compel Ms.
Maxwell to answer intrusive questions about her sex life. However, the related exhibits and
submissions appear to be much broader and include deposition transcripts, a "Flight Log Summary
Chart" and flight logs, and police reports.
None of the reasons Ms. Maxwell identifies warrants sealing these materials:
J. Does 1 and 2 have not asserted any objections with regard to these materials, despite
receiving notice and an opportunity to be heard.
Sexual content alone is insufficient to justify continued sealing of Ms. Maxwell's
deposition transcript. This case concerns allegations of sexual assault and trafficking of
minors. There is no recognized privacy interest in allegations of sex trafficking. Any
privacy interest Ms. Maxwell may have is substantially outweighed by the public interest
7
EFTA00017081

=== Page 9 ===
10
in disclosure, which will shed light on the abuse of young girls and women-and the
system that allowed the abuse to continue.
There is no support for Ms. Maxwell's claims that the third-party depositions are
unreliable. She simply claims that her counsel did not cross-examine the witnesses under
oath. But this is the hearsay standard, not the sealing standard. See Section II.F.
Whether Ms. Maxwell is identified as a "suspect, a perpetrator, or participant" in the police
reports is irrelevant to whether the police reports should be unsealed. Additionally, the
police reports are public records under Florida's Sunshine Act. See Fla. AG Advisory
Opinion AGO 80-96 ("...crime and arrest reports are not exempt from the inspection
provisions of the Public Records Law..."). This lends additional support to the release of
these documents in full here.
B.
Dkt. 153-1, Exhibits 4, 5, 6 and 7
Ms. Maxwell claims that the third-party depositions are unreliable and inadmissible. Again,
this is not the correct standard for sealing. See Section II.F.
C.
Dkt. 172 and Related Submissions
Ms. Maxwell contends that this request was filed for an improper purpose because it could
"have been a straightforward request by Plaintiff to exceed the presumptive 10 deposition limit set
by the Court." Dkt. 1057, at 8. What this filing could have been is irrelevant to the Court's analysis:
The relevant inquiry turns on what it was.
Ms. Maxwell does not dispute that the Plaintiff made this request to the Court seeking
judicial action and that the Court acted. The remaining arguments that Ms. Maxwell makes,
including that these are not judicial documents, are all addressed above and/or are non-sequiturs.
D.
Dkt. 199 and Related Submissions
8
EFTA00017082

=== Page 10 ===
10
For the reasons set forth above, there is no basis for continuing to seal these documents.
See Sections II.A, B, C, D.
Further, Ms. Maxwell's claim that the Court's ruling on these documents is premature
because they name other third parties who have not yet received notice is inconsistent with the
Court's note in Dkt. 1053. There, the Court said that it was "amenable to unsealing portions of
documents mentioning non-parties rather than waiting to unseal the entirety of a given document
until all non-parties have provided input." Intervenors ask that the Court follow the approach set
forth in Dkt. 1053.
E.
Dkt. 164 and Related Submissions
It appears the Court has received no objections regarding these submissions, and they
should be released (as to J. Does 1 and 2).
F.
Dkt. 230 and Related Submissions
It appears the Court has received no objections regarding these submissions, and they
should be released (as to J. Does 1 and 2).
CONCLUSION
For all of the foregoing reasons, Intervenors respectfully request that this Court unseal in
their entirety Dkt. entries 143, 164, 172, 199, and 230 and their related submissions (as they pertain
to J. Does 1 and 2).
Dated: New York, New York
Respectfully submitted,
June 24, 2020
/s/ Christine N. Walz
Sanford L. Bohrer
Christine N. Walz
31 West 52nd Street
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: 212.513.3200
Fax: 212.385.9010
Attorneys for Intervenors
Julie Brown and Miami Herald Media Company
9
EFTA00017083


c1: EFTA00015605
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015605.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
Subject: Fwd: epstein
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 13:43:04 +0000
Importance: Normal
Attachments: j782epsC.pdf; ATT00001.htm
The other one was from the second conference; this is from the first one
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Goretti Moya <gmoya@sdreporters.com
Date: July 8, 2019 at 17:12:36 EDT
To:
"
"
"
,
Subject: epstein
Please e-mail when youg et this
EFTA00015605


c1: EFTA00014887
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014887.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Letter
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 21:19:59 +0000
Attachments: 2021.11
.docx
Attached is a draft letter re
I'm hoping to send this to
tomorrow morning to review with him so we can
send out to the defense tomorrow.
Thanks!
Assistant United States Attorney
United States Attorney's Office
Southern District of New York
Tel:
EFTA00014887


c1: EFTA00014352
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014352.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
(USANYS)"
To:
)"
Subject: FW: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 20:16:35 +0000
Attachments: 042120_Letter_to_Robert_Kaplan_re_Request_for_Information_Relating_to_Jeffrey_Epstei
n.pdf,DOJ_001-091_Doe_Touhy_Request_to_DOJ_(encrypted).pdf
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 10:55 PM
To: 'Kate L. Doniger'
Cc:
>; Alexandra Conlon
>;
Roberta Kaplan
Subject: RE: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
Kate,
Per our conversation earlier today, please find attached a letter responding to your request for information relating to
Jeffrey Epstein, as well as the set of documents identified in the letter. I will send the password for the document file
separately.
Thank you,
From: Kate L. Doniger
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2020 9:09 AM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
>; Alexandra Conlon
>;
Roberta Kaplan
Subject: RE: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
Thanks very much,
Kate L. Doniger I Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2020 12:10 AM
To: Kate L. Doniger
Cc:
>; Alexandra Conlon
>;
Roberta Kaplan
Subject: RE: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
Kate,
EFTA00014352

=== Page 2 ===
Thank you for checking in. I hope you are keeping well also. I do not think we need any additional information from you at
this time. I hope to be able to provide an update early next week.
Thanks,
From: Kate L. Doniger
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 3:01 PM
To:
(USANYS)
Cc:
>; Alexandra Conlon
>;
Roberta Kaplan
Subject: RE: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
We hope that you are keeping well in this very challenging time.
We completely understand that all things are in flux these days, but we just wanted to check in with you about our
request and whether there is any other information you need from us. If it would be helpful to set up a call to discuss, we
are available at your convenience.
Best,
Kate
Kate L. Doniger I Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP
From:
(USANYS)
>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 7:23 PM
To: Alexandra Conlon
>; Roberta Kaplan
Cc: Kate L. Doniger
>;
Subject: RE: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
Alexandra and Robbie,
Thank you for this. I will contact you regarding the request.
Thanks,
From: Alexandra Conlon
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 7:54 PM
To:
(USANYS)
>; Roberta Kaplan
Cc: Kate L. Doniger
Subject: RE: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
SENT ON BEHALF OF ROBERTA KAPLAN
AUSA
EFTA00014353

=== Page 3 ===
Thank you for contacting us. Attached please find a Touhy letter and supporting exhibit requesting documents from the
Department of Justice in connection with our pending litigation against Jeffrey Epstein's estate.
We are happy to schedule a time to talk if it would be helpful to discuss our request.
Best Regards,
Robbie
Alexandra Conlon Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP
From:
(USANYS)
Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 6:59 PM
To: Roberta Kaplan
Cc: Kate L. Doniger
>; Alex Conlon
Subject: Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Ms. Kaplan,
Please find attached a letter regarding the request you discussed with AUSA
for certain information
relating to Jeffrey Epstein. As stated in the letter, please contact me once you have had a chance to review the letter if you
would like to discuss the issues therein further.
Thanks,
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
This email and its attachments may contain information that is confidential and/or protected from disclosure by the attorney-client, work product or other
applicable legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient of the email, please be aware that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the message from your computer system. Thank you.
This email and its attachments may contain information that is confidential and/or protected from disclosure by the attorney-client, work product or other
applicable legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient of the email, please be aware that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the message from your computer system. Thank you.
This email and its attachments may contain information that is confidential and/or protected from disclosure by the attorney-client, work product or other
applicable legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient of the email, please be aware that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the message from your computer system. Thank you.
EFTA00014354


c1: EFTA00015838
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015838.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
The Silvio J. Mollo Building
One Saint Andrew's Plaza
New York, New York 10007
July 23, 2020
VIA EMAIL
Marc A. Weinstein, Esq.
Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP
One Battery Park Plaza, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Andrew E. Tomback, Esq.
White & Case LLP
1221 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020
Re:
In re SDNY Investigation
Dear Marc and Andrew:
The Government writes with regard to several matters relevant to the estate of Jeffrey
Epstein, which we understand to be under the authority of your clients, Darren K. Indyke and
Richard D. Kahn, as co-executors of the estate and co-trustees of the 1953 Trust Agreement.
First, the 1953 Trust Agreement, produced on or about November 1, 2019, contains a
provision, at Section 2.5(B), that, among other things, and in sum and substance, states that to
provide for the continued maintenance and operations of the assets of the Trust Estate, the Trustees
shall ensure that all employees of certain entities shall continue to be employed for a period of two
years following the death of Jeffrey Epstein. It further provides that, "however, the Trustees shall
have the right [to] terminate the employment or the engagement of any such employees or service
providers if and at such times as the Trustees determine in their discretion that there is cause for
such termination." Such cause includes, among other things, "insubordination, breach of duty,
[and] disloyalty." We request that the Trustees confirm their understanding that whatever the
scope of that provision may be, it is not intended to and will not be used to suggest that any current
or former employee who chooses to meet with or provide information to law enforcement as part
of any ongoing investigation will be retaliated against in any way, or will lose any employment
benefit, or any other benefit, inheritance, or bequest, under the Trust Agreement. We also ask you
to confirm that this provision has not been invoked for any such reason to date.
Second, as you are aware, Ghislaine Maxwell has been charged with crimes relating to the
sexual abuse of minor girls and perjury in United States V. Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN). Should
she be convicted, she will be subject to the mandatory victim restitution provisions associated with
certain of the criminal charges against her. Accordingly, we request that your clients confirm
whether they have, to date, made any distribution to Maxwell and, if not, further confirm that they
EFTA00015838

=== Page 2 ===
July 23, 2020
Page 2
will notify the Government in advance of any disbursement to her during the pendency of the
criminal case.
Finally, in connection with the prosecution of Ms. Maxwell, the Government expects to
produce certain discovery materials to the defense, including certain materials obtained or seized
in connection with the case against Jeffrey Epstein (the "Seized Materials"). These materials will
be produced subject to a Court-ordered protective order. In connection with the Government's
anticipated production of the Seized Materials in the pending case, please advise whether the co-
executors-in their capacity as representatives of the estate-take a position on whether, generally
and at this time, any items within the Seized Materials remain subject to a potential claim of
attorney-client privilege, or, in the alternative, whether the estate is prepared to waive any claim
of privilege with respect to the Seized Materials, for purposes of the review and production of
discovery in the charged case.
Very truly yours,
AUDREY STRAUSS
A Acting United Attorney
By:
Assistant United States Attorneys
Southern District of New York
Tel:
EFTA00015839


c1: EFTA00016303
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016303.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
To: "FreemanNYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov"
<FreemanNYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov>
Cc:
Subject: Doe V. Indyke, et al., 20 Civ. 484 (DCF) (JGK)
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2020 02:16:54 +0000
Attachments: 2020-09-04,_GM_Government_leter_in_support_of_stay_application.pdf
Good evening,
Attached for Judge Freeman's consideration please find a letter from the Government in support of a stay in the above-
referenced matter.
Respectfully submitted,
EFTA00016303


c1: EFTA00016762
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00016762.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: "Zaveri, Mihir"
To:
Subject: NYT inquiry: Jeffrey Epstein injured in jail?
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 03:02:13 +0000
Hello, this is Mihir Zaveri, reporter at The New York Times.
We are seeing reports that Jeffrey Epstein was found injured in his jail cell after a possible suicide attempt or
some sort of assault: https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Jefrey-Epstein-Found-Injured-in-NYC-Jail-Cel-
After-Possible-Suicide-Attempt-or-Assault-Sources-513174311.html
Hoping tonight to confirm this or get any insight into what might have actually happened and where he is right
now.
I can be reached at
Mihir
EFTA00016762


c1: EFTA00015560
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015560.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From: Paul Cassell <
To:
Subject: RE: Victims responding to Epstein
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2019 20:08:25 +0000
Importance: Normal
Hey
I am drafting our response to Epstein's claim that the victims cannot obtain "rescission" as a remedy. Because my clients
would like to avoid interfering with your efforts in any way, would you like to see our draft before it is filed?
In particular, our brief begins with a section arguing that:
THIS CASE MUST BE DECIDED ON THE AGREED PREMISE THAT THE NPA ONLY COVERS THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA.
It occurs to me it might be useful for your Office to review that section before we file. We file in about one week.
Happy to handle this in any way you see best. Paul Cassell for ane Doe 1 and 2
Paul G. Cassell
Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law and University Distinguished Professor of Law
S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah
You can access my publications on http://ssrn.com/author=30160
CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended
only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy
this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic
mail and delete the original message. Professor Cassell is admitted to the Utah State Bar, but not the bars of other states.
Any views he expresses in this email are his own.
EFTA00015560


c1: EFTA00014619
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00014619.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
From:
)"
To:
)"
Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 19:52:08 +0000
Thanks! Called and left a message.
From:
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 1:48 PM
To:
Subject: Fwd: Jeffrey Epstein
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From:
Date: July 12, 2019 at 6:05:19 PM EDT
To:
Subject: Fwd: Jeffrey Epstein
This email was sent via my iPhone using the dictation app... Please understand there may be some typographical or
grammatical errors.
NOTICE: This E-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy
Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential and may be ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL.
It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named as recipient. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify sender immediately by re-sending
This communication to the sender and delete the original message and any copy of it from your
computer system.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Begin forwarded message:
EFTA00014619

=== Page 2 ===
From:
Date: July 12, 2019 at 11:22:04 AM EDT
To:
Cc:
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein
Mr.
It was great touching base with you this morning. As I mentioned on the phone, the Office of the State Attorney is
interested in any information that could lead to criminal charges from that crimes occurred in Palm Beach County. If
you aware of any victims who would like to make a statement to local law enforcement please advise. Feel free to pass
my contact information on to anyone who might have information.
Regards-
Assistant State Attorney
Special Victim's Unit
Human Trafficking and ICAC
Office Of The State Attorney
15th Judical Circuit
Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from state officials regarding state business are public records
available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.
EFTA00014620


c1: EFTA00015438
c2: DataSet 8
c3: VOL00008
c4: DataSet 8/VOL00008/IMAGES/0002/EFTA00015438.pdf
c6: pdf
c7: images
c0:
=== Page 1 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 1 of 13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
No. 20-CV-833(PAE)
V.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,
Defendant.
DECLARATION OF RUSSELL CAPONE
I, Russell Capone, hereby declare as follows:
1.
I am Counsel to the Acting United States Attorney in the United States Attorney's
Office for the Southern District of New York ("USAO-SDNY"). I have served in this capacity
since June 2020. Prior to my current role, I served as Deputy Chief and then Chief of the Public
Corruption Unit in the USAO-SDNY from July 2017 and as an Assistant United States Attorney
from January 2011. I supervised the Noel prosecution directly in my prior role as Chief of the
Public Corruption Unit, and I play a supervisory role over both the Noel and Tartaglione
prosecutions in my current role as Counsel to the Acting United States Attorney.
2.
I am familiar with the Freedom of Information Act requests filed by the New
York Times Company (the "FOIA Requests") that are the subject of this case, which seek
records related to the incarceration of Jeffrey Epstein at the Metropolitan Correctional Center
("MCC"). I am also familiar with the responsive records that defendant the Federal Bureau of
Prisons ("BOP") has withheld pursuant to exemptions 5, 6, 7(A), 7(C), 7(E), and 7(F) of FOIA, 5
U.S.C. § 552(b)(5)-(7). In addition, I am familiar with the proceedings in United States of
1
EFTA00015438

=== Page 2 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 2 of 13
America V. Noel, 19-CR-830 (AT), and United States of America V. Tartaglione, 16-CR-832
(KMK). True and correct copies of the Indictment filed in Noel on November 19, 2019 (the
"Noel Indictment"), and the Superseding Indictment filed in Tartaglione on April 16, 2019 (the
"Tartaglione Indictment"), are attached hereto as Exhibits A and B, respectively. The statements
contained in this declaration are based on my personal knowledge, documents maintained in the
files of the USAO-SDNY, conversations with members of the Noel and Tartaglione prosecution
teams at the USAO-SDNY, public court filings, and conclusions made in accordance therewith.
3.
I submit this declaration in support of BOP's motion for summary judgment in
this case.
The Prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein
4.
On July 2, 2019, Jeffrey Epstein was charged with one count of conspiracy to
commit sex trafficking, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, and one count of sex trafficking, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591(a), (b)(2), and 2. On July 6, 2019, Epstein was arrested and
thereafter incarcerated at the MCC until his death.
5.
On July 10, 2019, Epstein was assigned to the Special Housing Unit ("SHU") at
the MCC due to, among other things, a risk of suicidality and safety concerns relating to housing
him with the MCC's general population. On July 18, 2019, a bond hearing as to Epstein was
held before the Honorable Richard M. Berman, after which the Court granted the government's
motion for remand and denied Epstein's motion for pretrial release. See Noel Indictment I 10.
6.
On July 23, 2019, MCC officers responded to an emergency call and found
Epstein on the floor of his cell with a strip of bedsheet around his neck. See Noel Indictment
I 11. Michael Thomas, a correctional officer at the MCC and one of the defendants in the Noel
case, was one of the MCC officials who responded to this incident. See id. Epstein was
subsequently transferred out of the SHU, placed on suicide watch for 24 hours, and then
2
EFTA00015439

=== Page 3 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 3 of 13
transferred to psychological observation, a different status in a different location within MCC's
hospital ward, until July 30, 2019. On July 30, 2019, Epstein was transferred back to the SHU.
See id. II 11-13.
7.
On August 10, 2019, Epstein was found in his cell, not responsive and with a
noose around his neck. See id. I 26. He was transferred to a local hospital where he was
declared dead shortly thereafter. See id. I 27. The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner of the
City of New York conducted an autopsy and determined that Epstein had committed suicide by
hanging himself. See id.
8.
On August 29, 2019, following a public hearing on August 27, 2019, Judge
Berman entered an order of nolle prosequi against Epstein. See Nolle Prosequi, Dkt. No. 52,
United States V. Epstein, No. 19 Cr. 490 (RMB) (S.D.N.Y.).
The Prosecution of Tova Noel and Michael Thomas
9.
As alleged in the Noel Indictment, Thomas and Tova Noel were correctional
officers on duty at the SHU on August 9-10, 2019, the night of Epstein's death. See Noel
Indictment II 3-4. On that night, Noel and Thomas repeatedly failed to perform mandated
counts of prisoners under their watch, including Epstein. To conceal this failure, they repeatedly
signed false certifications attesting to having conducted multiple counts of inmates, when, in
truth, they had not conducted such counts. See id. II 15-24. On November 19, 2019, Noel and
Thomas were charged in the Noel Indictment with one count of conspiring to defraud the United
States and to make or use a false writing or document, in violation of Title 18, United States
Code, Section 371; and five counts as to Noel and three counts as to Thomas of making or using
a false writing or document, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001(a)(3) and
(2). Noel Indictment I 28-40. The Noel case is pending before the Honorable Analisa Torres.
Trial has been scheduled to begin on January 4, 2021.
3
EFTA00015440

=== Page 4 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 4 of 13
The Prosecution and Incarceration of Nicholas Tartaglione
10.
In a superseding indictment filed on April 16, 2019, Nicholas Tartaglione was
charged with one count of conspiracy to distribute narcotics, in violation of Title 21, United
States Code, Section 846; four counts of intentional killing in furtherance of a drug trafficking
crime, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Section 848(e)(1)(A) and Title 18, United
States Code, Section 2; three counts of murder through the use of a firearm in furtherance of a
drug trafficking crime, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 924(j) and 2; one
count of conspiracy to commit kidnapping, in violation of Title 18, United State Code, Section
1201; four counts of kidnapping resulting in death, in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Sections 1201(a)(1) and 2; and four counts of using a facility of interstate commerce to commit a
crime of violence in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1952 and 2. These
charges arise from the April 2016 murders of Martin Luna, Miguel Luna, Urbano Santiago, and
Hector Gutierrez. On April 19, 2019, USAO-SDNY filed a Notice of Intent to Seek the Death
Penalty against Tartaglione. The Tartaglione case is pending before the Honorable Kenneth M.
Karas. No trial date has been set.
11.
Tartaglione has been detained since he was arrested on December 19, 2016. For
certain periods of his detention, including in July 2019, Tartaglione was housed at the MCC. In
early July 2019, Tartaglione was transferred to the MCC's SHU. For a time, including on July
23, 2019, Tartaglione was housed in the same SHU cell as Jeffrey Epstein.
Records Withheld from Disclosure Pursuant to FOIA Exemption 7(A) on
Account of Likely Interference with Noel
12.
5 U.S.C. § 522 (b)(7)(A) ("Exemption 7(A)") exempts from disclosure "records
or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production
4
EFTA00015441

=== Page 5 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 5 of 13
of such law enforcement records or information
could reasonably be expected to interfere
with enforcement proceedings
"
13.
I and the prosecutors responsible for the Noel prosecution have reviewed each of
the records responsive to the FOIA requests withheld in full or in part under Exemption 7(A),
including those reflected on the index prepared by BOP and attached to the declaration of Kara
Christenson (the "BOP index"). All of these records fall within the scope of Exemption 7(A).
14.
Public disclosure of the records withheld under Exemption 7(A) could reasonably
be expected to interfere with the pending prosecutions of Noel and Thomas. These records
include information about which numerous witnesses are expected to testify at trial, include
details that are not publicly known or known to other witnesses, and include information and
documents authored by potential trial witnesses. These records also include potential trial
exhibits, which some or all potential trial witnesses have not seen, and premature disclosure of
those materials could influence witness testimony at trial, or enable witnesses to change or shape
their testimony. Premature disclosure of these records and/or the information contained therein
could reasonably be expected to influence witnesses' potential testimony at trial and/or allow
witnesses to alter their testimony to conform to other evidence.
15.
Further, premature public disclosure of the records withheld under Exemption
7(A) could reasonably be expected to impair the government's (and the defendants') ability to
seat a fair and impartial jury in Noel. The government anticipates that some of the records
withheld under Exemption 7(A) will be entered into evidence as exhibits at trial, and other
records that may not be trial exhibits bear on the contents of potential trial exhibits. Premature
disclosure of these records, or the information contained therein, could influence potential jurors'
understanding of the evidence at trial and the case overall. Similarly, premature disclosure of the
records could prejudice potential jurors for or against the defendants in the Noel action, which
5
EFTA00015442

=== Page 6 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 6 of 13
would also impair the government's (and the defendants') ability to seat a fair and impartial jury.
In addition, as noted above, these records include specific information about which witnesses are
expected to testify at trial, as well as information and documents authored by potential trial
witnesses, such that premature public disclosure could reasonably be expected to influence
potential jurors' perception of the witnesses and the evidence to be presented at trial.
16.
The risks of interference with the Noel proceedings are heightened by the media
coverage of speculation and theories about Epstein's death. Many publicly-discussed theories of
Epstein's death are unfounded. Premature release of the withheld records, particularly if the
records are released in part or without full context, may influence the perception of jurors who
have been exposed to such media coverage of speculation and theories.
Non-Email Records Withheld Pursuant to Exemption 7(A) on
Account of Likely Interference with Noel
17.
The considerations discussed above apply to each of the categories of responsive
non-email records withheld in full or in part by BOP under Exemption 7(A).
18.
First, the government anticipates that MCC staffing records, including overtime
logs and daily assignment rosters for the MCC on July 22, July 23 August 9, and 10, 2019 and
some of the dates in between, will be the subject of witness testimony at the Noel trial. In
addition, the government anticipates that some of these documents will be trial exhibits.
Releasing these materials prematurely could reasonably be expected to influence witnesses'
potential testimony at trial, allow witnesses to alter their testimony to conform to other evidence,
or influence potential jurors' perceptions of witness testimony or evidence.
19.
Second, the government anticipates that reports and memoranda prepared by
BOP, such as the reports, memoranda, photographs, and evidence of Epstein's July 23, 2019
apparent suicide attempt; reports, memoranda, and letters concerning Epstein's August 10, 2019
6
EFTA00015443

=== Page 7 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 7 of 13
suicide and surrounding events; documents in BOP's possession from the New York City Office
of Chief Medical Examiner; and reports and letters concerning MCC's and BOP's response to
Epstein's death, may be trial exhibits, the subject of witness testimony, or were prepared by
witnesses who will testify at trial. Premature disclosure of these materials could reasonably be
expected to influence witnesses' potential testimony at trial, allow witnesses to alter their
testimony to conform to other evidence, or influence potential jurors' perceptions of witness
testimony or evidence. Alternatively, if evidence of Epstein's July 23, 2019 suicide attempt or
August 10, 2019 suicide and surrounding events is excluded from evidence at trial, pre-trial
publication of these materials would risk exposing potential jurors for or against the defendants
in the Noel action on the basis of material they would otherwise not be shown during trial, which
would impair the government's (and the defendants') ability to seat a fair and impartial jury.
20.
Third, the government anticipates that certain medical and psychological records
of Epstein prepared by BOP may be trial exhibits, the subject of witness testimony, and/or were
prepared by witnesses who will testify at trial. Premature disclosure of these records could
influence the testimony of potential witnesses, including by potentially causing them to alter or
confirm their testimony. In addition, premature disclosure of these records could reasonably be
expected to prejudice potential jurors for or against the defendants in the Noel action, which
would impair the government's (and the defendants') ability to seat a fair and impartial jury.
21.
Fourth, the government anticipates that documents related to counts of inmates,
including logs, count slips, and rosters, and other entries in BOP logs for August 9 and 10 may
be trial exhibits, the subject of witness testimony, and/or were prepared by witnesses who will
testify at trial. Premature disclosure of these materials could reasonably be expected to influence
witnesses' potential testimony at trial, allow witnesses to alter their testimony to conform to
other evidence, and/or influence potential jurors' perceptions of witness testimony or evidence.
7
EFTA00015444

=== Page 8 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 8 of 13
22.
Fifth, the government anticipates that an August 8, 2019, review of inmates in the
SHU prepared by BOP may be a trial exhibit, the subject of witness testimony, and/or was
prepared by witnesses who will testify at trial. Premature disclosure of this record could
reasonably be expected to influence witnesses' potential testimony at trial and/or allow witnesses
to alter their testimony to conform to other evidence.
Email Records Withheld Pursuant to Exemption 7(A) on
Account of Likely Interference with Noel
23.
The considerations discussed above also apply to each of the categories of
responsive email documents withheld in full or in part by BOP under Exemption 7(A).
24.
First, emails pertaining to Epstein's July 23, 2019 apparent suicide attempt, his
incarceration prior to his suicide, and his mental health, including emails written by BOP's
Psychology Services, discuss topics and information that the government anticipates may be the
subject of witness testimony at the Noel trial. Their disclosure could influence witness
testimony, including by allowing witnesses to alter their testimony to conform to other evidence,
or influence potential jurors' perceptions of witness testimony or evidence. Alternatively, as
described above, if evidence of Epstein's July 23, 2019 suicide attempt or is excluded from
evidence at trial, pre-trial publication of these materials would risk exposing potential jurors for
or against the defendants in the Noel action on the basis of material they would otherwise not be
shown during trial, which would impair the government's (and the defendants') ability to seat a
fair and impartial jury.
25.
Second, emails relating to Epstein's death, investigations into Epstein's death, the
circumstances of his suicide, and the BOP's response to Epstein's death discuss topics and
information that the government anticipates will be relevant to and/or the subject of witness
testimony at the Noel trial. Their disclosure could influence witness testimony, including by
8
EFTA00015445

=== Page 9 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 9 of 13
allowing witnesses to alter their testimony to conform to other evidence, or influence potential
jurors' perceptions of witness testimony or evidence. Alternatively, as described above, if
evidence of Epstein's suicide is excluded from evidence at trial, pre-trial publication of these
materials would risk exposing potential jurors for or against the defendants in the Noel action on
the basis of material they would otherwise not be shown during trial, which would impair the
government's (and the defendants') ability to seat a fair and impartial jury.
26.
Providing more detailed public descriptions of the withheld documents and how
their release would interfere with the Noel prosecution would itself risk interfering with the Noel
prosecution. For example, public disclosure of more detailed descriptions of the documents
anticipated to be proffered as exhibits at trial, or that bear on other trial exhibits, would disclose
elements of the Government's trial strategy in Noel, including its selection of trial exhibits and
the anticipated content of witness testimony. More detailed public descriptions could also
prematurely disclose how the prosecution team expects the trial to proceed.
Records Withheld Pursuant to Exemption 7(A) on
Account of Likely Interference With Tartaglione
27.
In the course of reviewing the responsive records that BOP has withheld pursuant
to Exemption 7(A), prosecutors in the Criminal Division of the USAO-SDNY determined that
certain of the records refer to or discuss Tartaglione (the "Tartaglione Records"). Upon
determining that some of the records withheld by BOP refer to or discuss Tartaglione, USAO-
SDNY reviewed these records to determine whether their release would interfere with the
pending criminal action against Tartaglione. USAO-SDNY has concluded that release of certain
of the withheld records could reasonably be expected to interfere with the prosecution of
Tartaglione. This constitutes a basis to withhold these records under Exemption 7(A),
independent from the likely interference with the Noel prosecution discussed above.
9
EFTA00015446

=== Page 10 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 10 of 13
28.
The Tartaglione Records fall within several categories of responsive documents
withheld by BOP and include reports and evidence of Epstein's July 23, 2019 apparent suicide
attempt; reports and evidence of Epstein's death on August 10, 2019; email correspondence
between Tartaglione's attorneys and legal counsel at the MCC; and medical and psychological
records of Epstein prepared by BOP. The Tartaglione Records also include emails pertaining to
Epstein's July 23, 2019 apparent suicide attempt, Epstein's mental and physical health, and
Epstein's incarceration prior to his suicide.
29.
The Tartaglione Records fall within the scope of 7(A) because their disclosure
could reasonably be expected to interfere with the prosecution of Tartaglione. The Tartaglione
Records contain, among other things, information about Tartaglione's incarceration, including
the period of time during which Tartaglione was Epstein's cellmate at the MCC, which includes
the date of Epstein's apparent suicide attempt on July 23, 2019. The conditions of Tartaglione's
confinement at the MCC, as well as his interactions with Epstein in July 2019, have been put
directly at issue by Tartaglione's defense counsel, specifically in connection with the potential
penalty phase of the case against Tartaglione. See Letter dated January 13, 2010, Dkt. No. 186,
United States V. Tartaglione, No. 16 Cr. 832 (KMK); Letter dated January 21, 2020, Dkt. No.
193, United States V. Tartaglione, No. 16 Cr. 832 (KMK). In light of defense counsel's position,
information contained in the Tartaglione Records may be relevant evidence in any possible
penalty phase of the case against Tartaglione, and as a result, premature public disclosure of the
Tartaglione Records could reasonably be expected to influence witness testimony and/or
potential jurors' perceptions of witness testimony or evidence.
30.
Moreover, the nature of the charges against Epstein and the circumstances of his
apparent suicide attempt and death create a risk that premature public disclosure of the
Tartaglione Records could reasonably be expected to impair the government's (and the
10
EFTA00015447

=== Page 11 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 11 of 13
defendants') ability to seat a fair and impartial jury in Tartaglione, particularly for purposes of a
potential penalty-phase hearing required by 18 U.S.C. $ 3593, by influencing potential juror
perceptions of any interactions between Epstein and Tartaglione.
31.
The risks of interference with the Tartaglione proceedings are heightened by the
media coverage of speculation and theories about Epstein's death. As noted previously, many
publicly-discussed theories of Epstein's death are unfounded. The public dissemination of these
theories increases the risk that premature release of the Tartaglione Records could influence
witness testimony or jurors' perceptions, if records are released in part or without full context.
32.
The Tartaglione Records include several categories of records withheld by BOP.
Specifically, the government anticipates that premature disclosure of the reports and evidence of
Epstein's July 23, 2019 apparent suicide attempt; an inmate investigative report prepared prior to
Epstein's death; reports and evidence of Epstein's death on August 10, 2019; email
correspondence between Tartaglione's attorneys and legal counsel at the MCC; the August 8,
2019 review of inmates in the SHU at MCC; and the medical and psychological records of
Epstein prepared by BOP, including documents pertaining to his mental health, could reasonably
be expected to adversely affect the Tartaglione proceedings and influence potential jurors'
perceptions of Tartaglione, thereby impairing the district court's ability to seat a fair and
impartial jury. In addition, emails pertaining to Epstein's July 23, 2019 apparent suicide attempt,
Epstein's mental health, and Epstein's incarceration prior to his suicide, including emails that
involve members of the defense or prosecution teams in Tartaglione, discuss topics and
information that could adversely affect the Tartaglione proceedings and influence potential
juror's perceptions of Tartaglione. These records likewise could reasonably be expected to
impair the district court's ability to seat a fair and impartial jury.
11
EFTA00015448

=== Page 12 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 12 of 13
33.
Providing more detailed public descriptions of the withheld documents and how
their release would affect the Tartaglione prosecution would itself risk interfering with the
Tartaglione prosecution. For example, public disclosure of more detailed descriptions would
potentially implicate and publicize associations, interactions, or perceptions of associations or
interactions between Tartaglione and Epstein, thereby risking influencing potential jurors in
proceedings against Tartaglione, including for any sentencing hearing required by 18 U.S.C.
§ 3593.
Segregability
34.
The records withheld in full under Exemption 7(A) are exempt from disclosure in
their entirety under Exemption 7(A). To the extent the records contain any non-exempt
information, such information is inextricably intertwined with information that could reasonably
be expected to interfere with the Noel and/or Tartaglione prosecutions for the reasons discussed
above. The media coverage of speculation and theories about Epstein's death makes the
segregation of any possibly non-exempt information particularly difficult because providing
information pertaining to Epstein (or Tartaglione and Epstein) without complete context can
reasonably be expected to contribute to the dissemination of speculation and theories about his
death. This, in turn, could reasonably be expected to interfere with the district court's ability to
seat a fair and impartial jury in proceedings against Noel, Thomas, and/or Tartaglione, including
for any sentencing hearing required by 18 U.S.C. $ 3593, for the reasons discussed above.
12
EFTA00015449

=== Page 13 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22 Filed 08/05/20 Page 13 of 13
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Executed this 5 day of August 2020.
Russell Capone
Counsel to the Acting United States Attorney
United States Attorney's Office for the
Southern District of New York
13
EFTA00015450

=== Page 14 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22-1 Filed 08/05/20 Page 1 of 21
Exhibit A
EFTA00015451

=== Page 15 ===
Dumumentt2-FilEdled.180592Pagegecd 0021
JUDGE TORRES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
ORIGINAL
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
X
INDICTMENT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
:
19 Cr
- V. -
:
19 CRIM 830
TOVA NOEL and
:
MICHAEL THOMAS,
:
Defendants.
X
INTRODUCTION
1.
On or about August 10, 2019, TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL
THOMAS, the defendants, in dereliction of their duties as
correctional officers at the Metropolitan Correctional Center
("MCC"), repeatedly failed to perform mandated counts of prisoners
under their watch in the MCC's Special Housing Unit ("SHU").
Instead, for substantial portions of their shifts, NOEL and THOMAS
sat at their desk, browsed the internet, and moved around the
common area of the SHU. To conceal their failure to perform their
duties, NOEL and THOMAS repeatedly signed false certifications
attesting to having conducted multiple counts of inmates when, in
truth and in fact, they never conducted such counts. As a result
of those false statements, the MCC believed prisoners in the SHU
were being regularly monitored and accounted for when, in fact, as
a result of the defendants' conduct, no correctional officer
conducted any count or round of the SHU from approximately 10:30
EFTA00015452

=== Page 16 ===
p.m. on August 9 until approximately 6:30 a.m. on August 10, at
which time, as alleged herein, NOEL and THOMAS discovered the body
of an MCC inmate, Jeffrey Epstein, who had committed suicide
overnight while unobserved.
RELEVANT INDIVIDUALS AND ENTITIES
2. The MCC is a federal administrative detention
facility located in Manhattan that is run by the Federal Bureau of
Prisons ("BOP"). The MCC is one of several facilities used to
house inmates who have been charged with federal crimes in the
Southern District of New York and are awaiting trial. The MCC
employs correctional officers, whose primary duty is to ensure the
care, custody, and control of the inmate population of the MCC.
3. TOVA NOEL, the defendant, has been employed as a
correctional officer at the MCC since approximately 2016. As of
August 2019, NOEL's primary assignment was the SHU. On August 9,
2019, NOEL worked a regular shift from 4 p.m. to 12 a.m. in the
SHU, and then worked an overtime shift from 12 a.m. to 8 a.m. on
August 10, 2019, also in the SHU. NOEL had also worked a regular
shift in the SHU the day before, August 8, 2019, from 12 p.m. to
8 p.m.
4. MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendant, has been employed as
a correctional officer at the MCC since approximately 2007.
Beginning in approximately 2013, THOMAS was assigned to work as a
2
EFTA00015453

=== Page 17 ===
materials handler supervisor, although THOMAS regularly worked
overtime shifts as a correctional officer, including in the SHU.
THOMAS worked an overtime shift in the SHU on August 10, 2019,
from 12 a.m. to 8 a.m. THOMAS did not work his regular shift on
August 8 or August 9, 2019, but did work an overtime shift in the
SHU on August 9, 2019 from 12 a.m. to 8 a.m.
5. As detailed herein, Jeffrey Epstein was
incarcerated at the MCC between his arrest on July 6, 2019, and
his suicide on August 10, 2019. Epstein was detained pending
trial in the Southern District of New York on sex trafficking
charges.
THE MCC AND INSTITUTIONAL COUNTS
6. The MCC, which houses approximately 750 inmates at
any given time, assigns inmates to various housing units within
the MCC. The SHU is a housing unit within the MCC where inmates
are securely separated from the general inmate population to ensure
their own safety as well as the safety of staff and other inmates.
The SHU is located on the ninth floor of the MCC, and access to
that floor is controlled by a locked door that can be opened
remotely only by an officer in the MCC's centralized control center
(the "Control Center"), which is located on the first floor of the
MCC. Access into the SHU is also controlled by a second locked
door to which only correctional officers assigned to the SHU have
3
EFTA00015454

=== Page 18 ===
keys while on duty. Within the SHU, inmates are assigned to six
separate tiers, each of which can be accessed only via a single
locked door to which the correctional officers assigned to the SHU
have keys while on duty. Each tier has eight cells, each of which
can house either one or two prisoners, and each individual cell -
which is made of cement and metal - is accessed only through a
single locked door, to which only correctional officers assigned
to the SHU have keys while on duty.
7. The BOP requires correctional officers assigned to
guard inmates at the MCC to conduct institution-wide counts of
inmates at regular, scheduled intervals to ensure that each inmate
is alive and accounted for within the MCC (the "institutional
count"). On weekdays, the MCC conducts five institutional counts
at 4 p.m., 10 p.m., 12 a.m., 3 a.m., and 5 a.m. Performing an
institutional count is one of the most basic and essential aspects
of a correctional officer's job, and the count is one of the most
basic and essential functions of daily operation of the MCC. Two
officers are required to perform the institutional count for each
housing unit, including the SHU, and are further required to
document their performance of the count on an official MCC form
called a count slip. To perform the institutional count in the
SHU, two officers must walk from tier to tier to observe and count
each individual inmate.
4
EFTA00015455

=== Page 19 ===
8. On the count slip, both correctional officers are
required to fill in the date and time the count was performed,
write the total number of inmates physically present in the unit
counted, and then sign the count slip. Once the correctional
officers have completed and signed the count slips, the count slips
are then collected and delivered to the Control Center, where
officers within the Control Center are responsible for comparing
the count slips from each housing unit to the institution's inmate
roster to ensure that each inmate is accounted for. Only after
all the count slips are collected from each housing unit, and the
numbers on the slips are matched to the institution's inmate
roster, can the institutional count be deemed "cleared" or
completed. If a housing unit's count slip is incorrect or
incomplete, then the institution cannot "clear" the count.
Instead, the count must be completely redone in that housing unit
via a more-intensive version of the institutional count called a
"bed book count," in which officers must compare every individual
inmate to the institution's inmate roster. Records of each
institutional count, including the count slips, are provided to a
supervising official and retained by the MCC.
9. In addition to the institutional count, the BOP
requires correctional officers assigned to the SHU to walk each of
the tiers of the SHU - which is called a "round" - every thirty
5
EFTA00015456

=== Page 20 ===
minutes ("30-minute rounds"). Like the institutional counts,
correctional officers conduct 30-minute rounds to ensure that each
inmate is alive and accounted for within his cell. Correctional
officers working in the SHU are required to complete a form, which
is reviewed and signed by their supervisor, documenting the date
and time of each 30-minute round in each tier of the SHU.
EPSTEIN'S PRIOR APPARENT SUICIDE ATTEMPT
10. On July 6, 2019, inmate Jeffrey Epstein was
arrested and detained at the MCC on sex trafficking charges. On
July 10, 2019, Epstein was assigned to the SHU due to, among other
things, risk factors for suicidality and safety concerns relating
to housing him with the MCC's general population.
11. On July 23, 2019, while Epstein was housed in the
SHU, MCC officers responded to an emergency call, and found Epstein
on the floor of his cell with a strip of bedsheet around his neck.
MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendant, was one of the MCC officers who
responded to the incident. Epstein was subsequently transferred
out of the SHU and was placed on suicide watch. Inmates placed
on suicide watch are housed in a cell on the hospital wing floor
of the MCC, and are watched twenty-four hours a day by a staff
member or a specially trained inmate companion.
12. Epstein remained on suicide watch for approximately
twenty-four hours, and then was transferred to psychological
6
EFTA00015457

=== Page 21 ===
observation, until July 30, 2019. Psychological observation is
less restrictive than suicide watch, but inmates are still housed
in the hospital wing of the MCC and watched twenty-four hours a
day.
13. On July 30, 2019, Epstein was transferred back to
the SHU, and, at the direction of the MCC's psychological staff,
was required to have an assigned cellmate. Epstein was also
assigned to the cell closest to the correctional officers' desk in
the common area of the SHU, which was approximately fifteen feet
from the cell. Conducting the required institutional counts and
thirty-minute rounds in the SHU were also part of the MCC's
procedures for ensuring the safety of inmates, including Epstein.
EVENTS OF AUGUST 9-10, 2019
14. On August 9, 2019, Epstein's cellmate was
transferred out of the MCC in a routine, pre-arranged transfer at
approximately 8 a.m. Despite the MCC's psychological staff's
direction that Epstein have a cellmate, no new cellmate was
assigned to Epstein's cell.
15. TOVA NOEL, the defendant, was one of the assigned
officers on duty in the SHU from 4 p.m. on August 9, 2019 to 8
a.m. on August 10. From 4 p.m. to 12 a.m., two other officers
were on duty with NOEL in the SHU: one officer was assigned to
work from 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. ("Officer-1"), and one officer was
7
EFTA00015458

=== Page 22 ===
assigned to work from 4 p.m. to 12 a.m. ("Officer-2"). MICHAEL
THOMAS, the defendant, started his shift in the SHU at 12 a.m. on
August 10. From 12 a.m. until 8 a.m. on August 10, NOEL and THOMAS
were the only two officers on duty in the SHU.
16. During the time period from 4 p.m. on August 9 to
8 a.m. on August 10, the officers on duty in the SHU, including
TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendants, were responsible for
conducting five institutional counts: 4 p.m. and 10 p.m. on August
9; and 12 a.m., 3 a.m., and 5 a.m. on August 10. NOEL, THOMAS and
the other officers on duty were also responsible for completing
paperwork attesting to each of those counts. While, as detailed
herein, count slips were completed for each institutional count,
in fact, not a single one of those institutional counts was done.
17. TOVA NOEL, the defendant, and Officer-1 were
responsible for conducting the 4 p.m. institutional count in the
SHU. As video from the MCC's internal video surveillance system
makes clear, NOEL and Officer-1 did not perform the 4 p.m. count.
Nonetheless, NOEL and Officer-1 completed and signed a count slip
that falsely stated that the 4 p.m. institutional count had been
performed. In reliance on that falsified count slip, at
approximately 5:03 p.m., the Control Center cleared the 4 p.m.
count.
8
EFTA00015459

=== Page 23 ===
d020 21
18. That evening, Epstein returned to the SHU from his
attorney visit and was escorted into his cell by TOVA NOEL, the
defendant, and another officer at approximately 7:49 p.m. NOEL
and the other officer left the tier in which Epstein was housed
immediately thereafter.
19. By or before 10 p.m., all inmates in the MCC were
locked in their cells for the night. At or around that time, TOVA
NOEL, the defendant, and Officer-2 were responsible for conducting
the 10 p.m. institutional count in the SHU. However, video from
the MCC's internal video surveillance system shows that NOEL and
Officer-2 did not perform the 10 p.m. count. Nonetheless, NOEL
and Officer-2 completed and signed a count slip falsely stating
that the 10 p.m. institutional count had been performed. In
reliance on that falsified count slip, at approximately 10:36 p.m.,
the Control Center cleared the 10 p.m. count.
20. As reflected on video obtained from the MCC's
internal video surveillance system, at approximately 10:30 p.m. on
August 9, 2019 - after TOVA NOEL, the defendant, had signed and
submitted the 10 p.m. count slip and the institutional count had
been completed - NOEL briefly walked up to, and then walked back
from, the door to the tier in which Epstein was housed. As
confirmed by the video obtained from the MCC's internal video
surveillance system, this was the last time anyone, including any
9
EFTA00015460

=== Page 24 ===
correctional officer, walked up to, let alone entered, the only
entrance to the tier in which Epstein was housed until
approximately 6:30 a.m. on August 10.
21. Officer-1's shift ended at approximately 10 p.m.,
and at approximately 12 a.m., MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendant,
replaced Officer-2, joining TOVA NOEL, the defendant, as the only
two correctional officers on duty in the SHU. NOEL and THOMAS
were responsible for conducting the 12 a.m. institutional count in
the SHU. As confirmed by video from the MCC's internal video
surveillance system, NOEL and THOMAS did not perform the 12 a.m.
count. Nonetheless, NOEL and THOMAS completed and signed a count
slip for the 12 a.m. count that falsely stated that the
institutional count had been performed. In reliance on that
falsified count slip, at approximately 12:49 a.m., the Control
Center cleared the 12 a.m. count.
22. TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendants, were
additionally responsible for conducting the 3 a.m. and 5 a.m.
institutional counts in the SHU. As confirmed by video from the
MCC's internal video surveillance system, NOEL and THOMAS did not
perform either the 3 a.m. or the 5 a.m. counts. NOEL and THOMAS
nonetheless completed and signed count slips for both counts that
falsely stated that they had performed the 3 a.m. and 5 a.m.
institutional counts. In reliance on those falsified count slips,
10
EFTA00015461

=== Page 25 ===
at approximately 3:24 a.m. and 5:30 a.m., the Control Center
cleared the 3 a.m. and 5 a.m. counts, respectively.
23. Moreover, despite the requirement that officers on
duty in the SHU conduct and document regular, 30-minute rounds,
TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendants, did not perform any
of the required 30-minute rounds during their shift between
approximately 12 a.m. and 6:30 a.m. Nonetheless, NOEL completed
and signed more than 75 separate 30-minute round entries falsely
affirming that they had, in fact, conducted such rounds.
24. During the night, instead of completing the
required counts and rounds, TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, the
defendants, were seated at the correctional officers' desk in the
SHU common area (as noted above, approximately 15 feet from
Epstein's cell), used the computers, and moved around the SHU
common area. For a period of approximately two hours, NOEL and
THOMAS sat at their desk without moving, and appeared to have been
asleep. NOEL used the computer periodically throughout the night,
including to search the internet for furniture sales and benefit
websites. THOMAS used the computer briefly around 1 a.m., 4 a.m.,
and 6 a.m. to search for motorcycle sales and sports news.
25. At approximately 4 a.m., the overnight supervisor
briefly visited NOEL and THOMAS in the SHU, and conferred with
NOEL and THOMAS, who were seated at and around the officers' desk,
11
EFTA00015462

=== Page 26 ===
before leaving. At approximately 5:30 a.m., another correctional
officer briefly walked through the SHU common area. Aside from
those two officers, as confirmed by video surveillance, no one
else entered the SHU, no one conducted any counts or rounds
throughout the night, and no one entered the tier in which Epstein
was housed.
26. Shortly after 6 a.m. on August 10, 2019, MICHAEL
THOMAS and TOVA NOEL, the defendants, received a delivery of
breakfast carts into the SHU, after which time they were again the
only officers in the SHU. Shortly after 6:30 a.m., NOEL and THOMAS
walked up to and entered the tier in which Epstein was housed to
serve breakfast. At approximately 6:33 a.m., an alarm was
activated in the SHU. Epstein was alone in his cell and not
responsive, with a noose around his neck. A supervisor who had
just started his shift ("Supervisor-1") responded to the alarm
almost immediately thereafter, and as NOEL approached the door to
the SHU to open the door for Supervisor-1, NOEL told Supervisor-1
that "Epstein hung himself." After arriving in the SHU,
Supervisor-1 spoke with THOMAS and NOEL. NOEL told Supervisor-1
"we did not complete the 3 a.m. nor 5 a.m. rounds." THOMAS stated,
"we messed up," and "I messed up, she's not to blame, we didn't do
any rounds."
12
EFTA00015463

=== Page 27 ===
27. Epstein was transferred to a local hospital where
he was declared dead shortly thereafter. The Office of the Chief
Medical Examiner of the City of New York conducted an autopsy and
determined that Epstein had committed suicide by hanging himself.
STATUTORY ALLEGATIONS
COUNT ONE
(Conspiracy)
The Grand Jury charges:
28. The Grand Jury incorporates the allegations
contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 of this Indictment as though
fully set forth herein.
29. In or about August 2019, in the Southern District
of New York, TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendants,
knowingly conspired with each other to:
a. Knowingly defraud the United States by
impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful functions of a
department or agency of the United States, to wit, the MCC's
function to ensure the care, custody, and control of its inmate
population.
b. Knowingly make and use a false writing or
document knowing the same to contain a materially false,
fictitious, and fraudulent statement and entry with the intent to
impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper
administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any
13
EFTA00015464

=== Page 28 ===
department or agency of the United States, in violation of Title
18, United States Code, Section 1001 (a) (3).
30. In furtherance of the conspiracy and to effect the
illegal objects thereof, TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, the
defendants, committed the following overt acts, among others, in
the Southern District of New York:
a. On August 10, 2019, NOEL and THOMAS falsely
certified, on an MCC count slip, that they had performed the 12
a.m. institutional count of the SHU, when they had not in fact
done SO.
b. On August 10, 2019, NOEL and THOMAS falsely
certified, on an MCC count slip, that they had performed the 3
a.m. institutional count of the SHU, when they had not in fact
done SO.
C. On August 10, 2019, NOEL and THOMAS falsely
certified, on an MCC count slip, that they had performed the 5
a.m. institutional count of the SHU at MCC, when they had not in
fact done SO.
d. On August 10, 2019, NOEL falsely certified that
she and THOMAS had performed a series of 30-minute rounds of the
SHU between 12 a.m. and 6:30 a.m., when they had not in fact done
SO.
(Title 18, United States Code, Section 371)
14
EFTA00015465

=== Page 29 ===
COUNT TWO
(False Records - 4 p.m. Count)
The Grand Jury further charges:
31. The Grand Jury incorporates the allegations
contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 of this Indictment as though
fully set forth herein.
32. On or about August 9, 2019, in the Southern District
of New York, TOVA NOEL, the defendant, willfully and knowingly did
make and use a false writing or document knowing the same to
contain a materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement
and entry with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the
investigation or proper administration of any matter within the
jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States, and
did attempt to do the same, to wit, NOEL created, signed, and
submitted to the MCC a materially false count slip indicating that
she had performed the 4 p.m. institutional count of the SHU, when
she had not in fact done SO.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001 (a) (3) and 2)
COUNT THREE
(False Records - 10 p.m. Count)
The Grand Jury further charges:
33. The Grand Jury incorporates the allegations
contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 of this Indictment as though
fully set forth herein.
15
EFTA00015466

=== Page 30 ===
34. On or about August 9, 2019, in the Southern District
of New York, TOVA NOEL, the defendant, willfully and knowingly did
make and use a false writing or document knowing the same to
contain a materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement
and entry with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the
investigation or proper administration of any matter within the
jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States, and
did attempt to do the same, to wit, NOEL created, signed, and
submitted to the MCC a materially false count slip indicating that
she had performed the 10 p.m. institutional count of the SHU, when
she had not in fact done SO.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001 (a) (3) and 2)
COUNT FOUR
(False Records - 12 a.m. Count)
The Grand Jury further charges:
35. The Grand Jury incorporates the allegations
contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 of this Indictment as though
fully set forth herein.
36. On or about August 10, 2019, in the Southern
District of New York, TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendants,
willfully and knowingly did make and use a false writing or
document knowing the same to contain a materially false,
fictitious, and fraudulent statement and entry with the intent to
impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper
16
EFTA00015467

=== Page 31 ===
administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any
department or agency of the United States, and did attempt to do
the same, to wit, NOEL and THOMAS created, signed, and submitted
to the MCC a materially false count slip indicating that they had
performed the 12 a.m. institutional count of the SHU, when they
had not in fact done SO.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001 (a) (3) and 2)
COUNT FIVE
(False Records - 3 a.m. Count)
The Grand Jury further charges:
37. The Grand Jury incorporates the allegations
contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 of this Indictment as though
fully set forth herein.
38. On or about August 10, 2019, in the Southern
District of New York, TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendants,
willfully and knowingly did make and use a false writing or
document knowing the same to contain a materially false,
fictitious, and fraudulent statement and entry with the intent to
impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper
administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any
department or agency of the United States, and did attempt to do
the same, to wit, NOEL and THOMAS created, signed, and submitted
to the MCC a materially false count slip indicating that they had
17
EFTA00015468

=== Page 32 ===
performed the 3 a.m. institutional count of the SHU, when they had
not in fact done SO.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001 (a) (3) and 2)
COUNT SIX
(False Records - 5 a.m. Count)
The Grand Jury further charges:
39. The Grand Jury incorporates the allegations
contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 of this Indictment as though
fully set forth herein.
40. On or about August 10, 2019, in the Southern
District of New York, TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, the defendants,
willfully and knowingly did make and use a false writing or
document knowing the same to contain a materially false,
fictitious, and fraudulent statement and entry with the intent to
impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper
administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any
department or agency of the United States, and did attempt to do
the same, to wit, NOEL and THOMAS created, signed, and submitted
to the MCC a materially false count slip indicating that they had
18
EFTA00015469

=== Page 33 ===
performed the 5 a.m. institutional count of the SHU, when they had
not in fact done SO.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001 (a) (3) and 2)
Tracy FOREPERSON
GEOFFREY S BERMAN
Geoffing S. Bermor
United States Attorney
19
EFTA00015470

=== Page 34 ===
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- V. -
TOVA NOEL and
MICHAEL THOMAS,
Defendants.
INDICTMENT
19 Cr.
Title 18, United States Code,
Sections 371, 1001 (a) (3), and 2.
GEOFFREY S. BERMAN
United States Attorney
A TRUE BILL
Foreperson.
2 ARREST warrants
Indictment Filed
Assigned to Judge TORRES
Hon. Sarah Netburn, USMJ
@
X
11/19/19
EFTA00015471

=== Page 35 ===
Case 1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 22-2 Filed 08/05/20 Page 1 of 21
Exhibit B
EFTA00015472

=== Page 36 ===
twent flud 4/16/19 Courtflow 3mins
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 220 Filed 04/05/20 Page P off 20
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
X
:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT
:
- V. -
S4 16 Cr. 832 (KMK)
:
NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE,
:
Defendant.
:
X
COUNT ONE
The Grand Jury charges:
1.
From at least in or about 2015, up to and
including in or about April 2016, in the Southern District of
New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the defendant, and
others known and unknown, intentionally and knowingly did
combine, conspire, confederate, and agree together and with each
other to violate the narcotics laws of the United States.
2. It was a part and an object of the conspiracy
that NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the defendant, and others known and
unknown, would and did distribute and possess with intent to
distribute a controlled substance, in violation of Title 21,
United States Code, Section 841 (a) (1).
3. The controlled substance that NICHOLAS
TARTAGLIONE, the defendant, conspired to distribute and possess
with intent to distribute was 5 kilograms and more of mixtures
EFTA00015473

=== Page 37 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 22-2 Filled 04/05/20 Page 2 of 21
and substances containing a detectable amount of cocaine, in
violation of Title 21, United States Code, Section 841 (b) (1) (A).
(Title 21, United States Code, Section 846.)
COUNT TWO
The Grand Jury further charges:
4. In or about April 2016, in the Southern District
of New York, while engaged in an offense punishable under
Section 841 (b) (1) (A) of Title 21, United States Code, to wit, a
conspiracy to distribute, and to possess with the intent to
distribute, 5 kilograms and more of mixtures and substances
containing a detectable amount of cocaine, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE,
the defendant, intentionally and knowingly killed, and
counseled, commanded, induced, procured, and caused the
intentional killing of Martin Luna, in and around a bar known as
the Likquid Lounge at 69 Brookside Avenue, Chester, New York
(the "Likquid Lounge"), and did aid and abet the same.
(Title 21, United States Code, Section 848 (e) (1) (A);
Title 18, United States Code, Section 2.)
COUNT THREE
The Grand Jury further charges:
5. In or about April 2016, in the Southern District
of New York, while engaged in an offense punishable under
Section 841 (b) (1) (A) of Title 21, United States Code, to wit, a
conspiracy to distribute, and to possess with the intent to
2
EFTA00015474

=== Page 38 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 31 of 21
distribute, 5 kilograms and more of mixtures and substances
containing a detectable amount of cocaine, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE,
the defendant, intentionally and knowingly killed, and
counseled, commanded, induced, procured, and caused the
intentional killing of Urbano Santiago, in and around the
vicinity of 419 Old Mountain Road in Otisville, New York, and
did aid and abet the same.
(Title 21, United States Code, Section 848 (e) (1) (A);
Title 18, United States Code, Section 2.)
COUNT FOUR
The Grand Jury further charges:
6. In or about April 2016, in the Southern District
of New York, while engaged in an offense punishable under
Section 841 (b) (1) (A) of Title 21, United States Code, to wit, a
conspiracy to distribute, and to possess with the intent to
distribute, 5 kilograms and more of mixtures and substances
containing a detectable amount of cocaine, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE,
the defendant, intentionally and knowingly killed, and
counseled, commanded, induced, procured, and caused the
intentional killing of Miguel Luna, in and around the vicinity
of 419 Old Mountain Road in Otisville, New York, and did aid and
abet the same.
(Title 21, United States Code, Section 848 (e) (1) (A) ;
Title 18, United States Code, Section 2.)
3
EFTA00015475

=== Page 39 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 4 of 21
COUNT FIVE
The Grand Jury further charges:
7.
In. or about April 2016, in the Southern District
of New York, while engaged in an offense punishable under
Section 841 (b) (1) (A) of Title 21, United States Code, to wit, a
conspiracy to distribute, and to possess with the intent to
distribute, 5 kilograms and more of mixtures and substances
containing a detectable amount of cocaine, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE,
the defendant, intentionally and knowingly killed, and
counseled, commanded, induced, procured, and caused the
intentional killing of Hector Gutierrez, in and around the
vicinity of 419 Old Mountain Road in Otisville, New York, and
did aid and abet the same.
(Title 21, United States Code, Section 848 (e) (1) (A);
Title 18, United States Code, Section 2.)
COUNT SIX
The Grand Jury further charges:
8. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the defendant,
willfully and knowingly, during and in relation to a drug
trafficking crime for which he may be prosecuted in a court of
the United States, namely, the narcotics conspiracy charged in
Count One of this Indictment, did use and carry a firearm, and,
in furtherance of such drug trafficking crime, did possess a
4
EFTA00015476

=== Page 40 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 5 of 21
firearm, and in the course of that drug trafficking crime did,
through the use of a firearm, cause the death of Urbano
Santiago, which killing was murder as defined in Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1111(a), and did aid and abet the
same.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 924(j) and 2.)
COUNT SEVEN
The Grand Jury further charges:
9. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the defendant,
willfully and knowingly, during and in relation to a drug
trafficking crime for which he may be prosecuted in a court of
the United States, namely, the narcotics conspiracy charged in
Count One of this Indictment, did use and carry a firearm, and,
in furtherance of such drug trafficking crime, did possess a
firearm, and in the course of that drug trafficking crime did,
through the use of a firearm, cause the death of Miguel Luna,
which killing was murder as defined in Title 18, United States
Code, Section 1111(a), and did aid and abet the same.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 924(j) and 2.)
COUNT EIGHT
The Grand Jury further charges:
10. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the defendant,
5
EFTA00015477

=== Page 41 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 6 of 21
willfully and knowingly, during and in relation to a drug
trafficking crime for which he may be prosecuted in a court of
the United States, namely, the narcotics conspiracy charged in
Count One of this Indictment, did use and carry a firearm, and,
in furtherance of such drug trafficking crime, did possess a
firearm, and in the course of that drug trafficking crime did,
through the use of a firearm, cause the death of Hector
Gutierrez, which killing was murder as defined in Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1111 (a), and did aid and abet the
same.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 924(j) and 2.)
COUNT NINE
The Grand Jury further charges:
11. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the
defendant, and others known and unknown, unlawfully and
knowingly did conspire to violate Title 18, United States Code,
Section 1201.
12. It was a part and an object of the conspiracy
that NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the defendant, and others known and
unknown, would and did unlawfully seize, confine, inveigle,
decoy, kidnap, abduct, and carry away and hold for ransom and
reward and otherwise a person, and used a means, facility, and
instrumentality of interstate and foreign commerce in committing
6
EFTA00015478

=== Page 42 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RK Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page B of 21
and in furtherance of the commission of the offense, to wit,
TARTAGLIONE and others known and unknown agreed to inveigle,
sei,ze, and confine Martin Luna, Urbano Santiago, Miguel Luna,
and Hector Gutierrez in and around the Likquid Lounge.
Overt Act
13. In furtherance of the conspiracy and to effect
the illegal object thereof, the following overt act, among
others, was committed in the Southern District of New York and
elsewhere:
a. On or about April 11, 2016, NICHOLAS
TARTAGLIONE and others lured Martin Luna to the Likquid Lounge,
where TARTAGLIONE and others confined Martin Luna, Urbano
Santiago, Miguel Luna, and Hector Gutierrez and would not permit
them to leave the premises.
(Title 18, United States Code, Section 1201 (c)
COUNT TEN
The Grand Jury further charges:
14. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the
defendant, and others known and unknown, unlawfully, willfully,
and knowingly did seize, confine, inveigle, decoy, kidnap,
abduct, and carry away and hold for ransom and reward and
otherwise a person, and used a means, facility, and
instrumentality of interstate and foreign commerce in committing
7
EFTA00015479

=== Page 43 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 8 of 21
and in furtherance of the commission of the offense, and did aid
and abet the same, to wit, TARTAGLIONE lured Martin Luna to the
Likquid Lounge and confined Martin Luna in and around the
Likquid Lounge, which resulted in the death of Martin Luna.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1201 (a) (1) and 2.)
COUNT ELEVEN
The Grand Jury further charges:
15. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the
defendant, and others known and unknown, unlawfully, willfully,
and knowingly did seize, confine, inveigle, decoy, kidnap,
abduct, and carry away and hold for ransom and reward and
otherwise a person, and used a means, facility, and
instrumentality of interstate and foreign commerce in committing
and in furtherance of the commission of the offense, and did aid
and abet the same, to wit, TARTAGLIONE and others seized and
confined Urbano Santiago in and around the Likquid Lounge and in
and around the vicinity of 419 Old Mountain Road in Otisville,
New York, which resulted in the death of Urbano Santiago.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1201 (a) (1) and 2.)
COUNT TWELVE
The Grand Jury further charges:
16. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the
8
EFTA00015480

=== Page 44 ===
Caase172D6eB3K 11 Filed 08/05/29 Page 9006221
defendant, and others known and unknown, unlawfully, willfully,
and knowingly did seize, confine, inveigle, decoy, kidnap,
abduct, and carry away and hold for ransom and reward and
otherwise a person, and used a means, facility, and
instrumentality of interstate and foreign commerce in committing
and in furtherance of the commission of the offense, and did aid
and abet the same, to wit, TARTAGLIONE and others seized and
confined Miguel Luna in and around the Likquid Lounge and in and
around the vicinity of 419 Old Mountain Road in Otisville, New
York, which resulted in the death of Miguel Luna.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1201 (a) (1) and 2.)
COUNT THIRTEEN
The Grand Jury further charges:
17. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the
defendant, and others known and unknown, unlawfully, willfully,
and knowingly did seize, confine, inveigle, decoy, kidnap,
abduct, and carry away and hold for ransom and reward and
otherwise a person, and used a means, facility, and
instrumentality of interstate and foreign commerce in committing
and in furtherance of the commission of the offense, and did aid
and abet the same, to wit, TARTAGLIONE and others seized and
confined Hector Gutierrez in and around the Likquid Lounge and
in and around the vicinity of 419 Old Mountain Road in
9
EFTA00015481

=== Page 45 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RME Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 110 off 20
Otisville, New York, which resulted in the death of Hector
Gutierrez.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1201 (a) (1) and 2.)
COUNT FOURTEEN
The Grand Jury further charges:
18. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the
defendant, knowingly traveled in interstate and foreign commerce
and used the mails and any facility in interstate and foreign
commerce with intent to commit a crime of violence, namely,
assault and murder, to further an unlawful activity, namely, a
business enterprise involving a controlled substance, and with
intent to promote, manage, establish, and carry on, and
facilitate the promotion, management, establishment, and
carrying on of the unlawful activity, and thereafter did perform
a crime of violence to further the unlawful activity, and did
aid and abet the same, and death resulted, to wit, TARTAGLIONE
arranged for Martin Luna to be lured to the Likquid Lounge,
where Luna was killed.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1952
and 2.)
COUNT FIFTEEN
The Grand Jury further charges:
19. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the
10
EFTA00015482

=== Page 46 ===
Case 1:26-v-00833-RME Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 112 off 20
defendant, knowingly traveled in interstate and foreign commerce
and used the mails and any facility in interstate and foreign
commerce with intent to commit a crime of violence, namely,
assault and murder, to further an unlawful activity, namely, a
business enterprise involving a controlled substance, and with
intent to promote, manage, establish, and carry on, and
facilitate the promotion, management, establishment, and
carrying on of the unlawful activity, and thereafter did perform
a crime of violence to further the unlawful activity, and did
aid and abet the same, and death resulted, to wit, after Urbano
Santiago accompanied Martin Luna to the Likquid Lounge, where
Luna had been lured by TARTAGLIONE and others, Urbano Santiago
was held captive, transported to the vicinity of 419 Old
Mountain Road in Otisville, New York, and killed.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1952
and 2.)
COUNT SIXTEEN
The Grand Jury further charges:
20. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the
defendant, knowingly traveled in interstate and foreign commerce
and used the mails and any facility in interstate and foreign
commerce with intent to commit a crime of violence, namely,
assault and murder, to further an unlawful activity, namely, a
business enterprise involving a controlled substance, and with
11
EFTA00015483

=== Page 47 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RME Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 13 off 20
intent to promote, manage, establish, and carry on, and
facilitate the promotion, management, establishment, and
carrying on of the unlawful activity, and thereafter did perform
a crime of violence to further the unlawful activity, and did
aid and abet the same, and death resulted, to wit, after Miguel
Luna accompanied Martin Luna to the Likquid Lounge, where Martin
Luna had been lured by TARTAGLIONE and others, Miguel Luna was
held captive, transported to the vicinity of 419 Old Mountain
Road in Otisville, New York, and killed.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1952
and 2.)
COUNT SEVENTEEN
The Grand Jury further charges:
21. On or about April 11, 2016, in the Southern
District of New York and elsewhere, NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE, the
defendant, knowingly traveled in interstate and foreign commerce
and used the mails and any facility in interstate and foreign
commerce with intent to commit a crime of violence, namely,
assault and murder, to further an unlawful activity, namely, a
business enterprise involving a controlled substance, and with
intent to promote, manage, establish, and carry on, and
facilitate the promotion, management, establishment, and
carrying on of the unlawful activity, and thereafter did perform
a crime of violence to further the unlawful activity, and did
aid and abet the same, and death resulted, to wit, after Hector
12
EFTA00015484

=== Page 48 ===
Case 1:26-v-00833-RME Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 1134 off 20
Gutierrez accompanied Martin Luna to the Likquid Lounge, where
Luna had been lured by TARTAGLIONE and others, Hector Gutierrez
was held captive, transported to the vicinity of 419 Old
Mountain Road in Otisville, New York, and killed.
(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1952
and 2.)
SPECIAL FINDINGS
22. Counts Two and Ten of this Indictment are
realleged and incorporated by reference as though fully set
forth herein. As to Counts Two and Ten, alleging the
intentional killing of Martin Luna in furtherance of a drug
trafficking crime (Count Two) and the kidnapping resulting in
death of Martin Luna (Count Ten), the defendant NICHOLAS
TARTAGLIONE:
a. was 18 years of age or older at the time of
the offense (Title 18, United States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) ) ;
b. intentionally killed the victim (Title 18,
United States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) (A) ) ;
C. intentionally inflicted serious bodily
injury that resulted in the death of the victim (Title 18,
United States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) (B) ) ;
d. intentionally participated in an act,
contemplating that the life of a person would be taken and
intending that lethal force would be used in connection with a
13
EFTA00015485

=== Page 49 ===
Case 1:26-v-00833-RME Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 114 off 20
person, other than one of the participants in the offense, and
the victim died as a direct result of the act (Title 18, United
States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) (C) ) ;
e. intentionally and specifically engaged in an
act of violence, knowing that the act created a grave risk of
death to a person, other than one of the participants in the
offense, such that participation in the act constituted a
reckless disregard for human life and the victim died as a
direct result of the act (Title 18, United States Code, Section
3951 (a) (2) (D) ;
f. caused the death, and injury resulting in
death, of the victim, during the commission of an offense under
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1201 (kidnapping) (Title
18, United States Code, Section 3592 (c) (1) ;
g.
committed the offense in an especially
heinous, cruel, and depraved manner in that it involved torture
and serious physical abuse to the victim (Title 18, United
States Code, Section 3592 (c) (6) ;
h. committed the offense after substantial
planning and premeditation to cause the death of a person (Title
18, United States Code, Section 3592 (c) (9) ) ; and
i. intentionally killed and attempted to kill
more than one person in a single criminal episode (Title 18,
United States Code, Section 3592 (c) (16)).
14
EFTA00015486

=== Page 50 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RME Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 15 off 20
23. Counts Three, Six, and Eleven of this Indictment
are realleged and incorporated by reference as though fully set
forth herein. As to Counts Three, Six, and Eleven, alleging the
intentional killing of Urbano Santiago in furtherance of a drug
trafficking crime (Count Three), the murder of Urbano Santiago
through the use of a firearm in furtherance of a drug
trafficking crime (Count Six), and the kidnapping resulting in
death of Urbano Santiago (Count Eleven), the defendant NICHOLAS
TARTAGLIONE:
a. was 18 years of age or older at the time of
the offense (Title 18, United States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) ) ;
b. intentionally participated in an act,
contemplating that the life of a person would be taken and
intending that lethal force would be used in connection with a
person, other than one of the participants in the offense, and
the victim died as a direct result of the act (Title 18, United
States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) (C) ) ;
C. intentionally and specifically engaged in an
act of violence, knowing that the act created a grave risk of
death to a person, other than one of the participants in the
offense, such that participation in the act constituted a
reckless disregard for human life and the victim died as a
direct result of the act (Title 18, United States Code, Section
3951 (a) (2) (D) ;
15
EFTA00015487

=== Page 51 ===
Case 1:26-v-00833-RME Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 1167 off 20
d.
caused the death, and injury resulting in
death, of the victim, during the commission of an offense under
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1201 (kidnapping) (Title
18, United States Code, Section 3592 (c) (1) ) ;
e. committed the offense after substantial
planning and premeditation to cause the death of a person (Title
18, United States Code, Section 3592 (c) (9) ) ; and
f. intentionally killed more than one person in
a single criminal episode (Title 18, United States Code, Section
3592 (c) (16)
24. Counts Four, Seven, and Twelve of this Indictment
are realleged and incorporated by reference as though fully set
forth herein. As to Four, Seven, and Twelve, alleging the
intentional killing of Miguel Luna in furtherance of a drug
trafficking crime (Count Four), the murder of Miguel Luna
through the use of a firearm in furtherance of a drug
trafficking crime (Count Seven), and the kidnapping resulting in
death of Miguel Luna (Count Eleven), the defendant NICHOLAS
TARTAGLIONE:
a. was 18 years of age or older at the time of
the offense (Title 18, United States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) ) ;
b. intentionally participated in an act,
contemplating that the life of a person would be taken and
intending that lethal force would be used in connection with a
16
EFTA00015488

=== Page 52 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 18 off 20
person, other than one of the participants in the offense, and
the victim died as a direct result of the act (Title 18, United
States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) (C) ) ;
C. intentionally and specifically engaged in an
act of violence, knowing that the act created a grave risk of
death to a person, other than one of the participants in the
offense, such that participation in the act constituted a
reckless disregard for human life and the victim died as a
direct result of the act (Title 18, United States Code, Section
3951 (a) (2) (D) ;
d. caused the death, and injury resulting in
death, of the victim, during the commission of an offense under
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1201 (kidnapping) (Title
18, United States Code, Section 3592 (c) (1) ;
e.
committed the offense after substantial
planning and premeditation to cause the death of a person (Title
18, United States Code, Section 3592 (c) (9) ) ; and
f. intentionally killed more than one person in
a single criminal episode (Title 18, United States Code, Section
3592 (c) (16) ) .
25. Counts Five, Eight, and Thirteen of this
Indictment are realleged and incorporated by reference as though
fully set forth herein. As to Counts Five, Eight, and Thirteen,
alleging the intentional killing of Hector Gutierrez in
17
EFTA00015489

=== Page 53 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RME Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 18 off 20
furtherance of a drug trafficking crime (Count Five), the murder
of Hector Gutierrez through the use of a firearm in furtherance
of a drug trafficking crime (Count Eight), and the kidnapping
resulting in death of Hector Gutierrez (Count Thirteen), the
defendant NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE:
a. was 18 years of age or older at the time of
the offense (Title 18, United States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) ) ;
b. intentionally participated in an act,
contemplating that the life of a person would be taken and
intending that lethal force would be used in connection with a
person, other than one of the participants in the offense, and
the victim died as a direct result of the act (Title 18, United
States Code, Section 3591 (a) (2) (C) ;
C. intentionally and specifically engaged in an
act of violence, knowing that the act created a grave risk of
death to a person, other than one of the participants in the
offense, such that participation in the act constituted a
reckless disregard for human life and the victim died as a
direct result of the act (Title 18, United States Code, Section
3951 (a) (2) (D) ;
d. caused the death, and injury resulting in
death, of the victim, during the commission of an offense under
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1201 (kidnapping) (Title
18, United States Code, Section 3592 (c) (1) ) ;
18
EFTA00015490

=== Page 54 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 220 Filed 04/05/20 Page 20 off 20
e.
committed the offense after substantial
planning and premeditation to cause the death of a person (Title
18, United States Code, Section 3592 (c) (9) ); and
f. intentionally killed more than one person in
a single criminal episode (Title 18, United States Code, Section
3592(c)(16)).
CRP
GEOFFREY S. S, BERMAN Berman
United States Attorney
19
EFTA00015491

=== Page 55 ===
Case 1:26-cv-00833-RMK Document 220 Filled 04/05/20 Page 20 off 20
Form No. USA-33s-274 (Ed. 9-25-58)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- V. -
NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE,
Defendant.
SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT
S4 16 Cr. 832 (KMK)
(21 U.S.C. $$ 846 and 848 (e) ;
18 U.S.C. §§ 924 (j), 1201 (c),
1201 (a) (1), 1952, and 2.)
od
GEOFFREY S. BERMAN
Foreperson
United States Attorney.
EFTA00015492


