Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-02691314DOJ Data Set 11Other

EFTA02691314

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 11
Reference
efta-02691314
Pages
3
Persons
0
Integrity

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
To: Kathy Mathew Sent: Wed 7/13/2011 9:47:59 AM Subject: RE: Operation Weeting query Dear Kathy Mathews, Thank you for your email dated 8th July 2011. Based on the telephone numbers and name you have provided I have completed checks against all the searchable material held to date and can confirm there is currently no trace of documentation indicating your clients voicemail messages were unlawfully intercepted. As a part of Operation Weeting officers regularly review all data alongside any new information that may come to light. Please be assured if any information comes to light linking you to this enquiry we will endeavour to contact you directly. If you have any queries or questions in relation to the above please contact me on the below details. Kind regards Michael Williams Detective Constable WPhone WMobil :Address Specialist Crime Directorate Operation Weeting 4th Floor Jubilee House 230 to 232 Putney Bridge Road I otidun From: Kathy Mathews [mailto Sent: 08 July 2011 15:09 To: Williams Michael V - QA Subject: Operation Weeting query Dear DC Williams, Further to our earlier conversation, I should be grateful to have all details relating to any instances where the phones pertaining to our client, Mr. Jeffrey Epstein, may have been the subject of unlawful interception. The relevant numbers are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. EFTA_R1_02033116 EFTA02691314 8. I look forward to hearing from your team as a matter of some urgency. Yours sincerely, Kathy Mathews Kathy Mathews Solicitor I JOHNSONS Belfast I Dublin I London t. f e w: www.iohnsonslaw.com London Office: 21 Arlington Street, London. SW1A 1RN t: f: Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority Firm SRA IL http://www.sra.oro.uktrules Disclaimer: This e-mail transmission may be legally privileged but is, in any event, confidential and intended solely for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or disseminate the information in it, or take any action in reliance of it. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to EFTA_R1_02033117 EFTA02691315 be the views of Johnsons Solicitors. If you have received this message in error, do not open any attachment, but please notify the individual sender (above) deleting this message from your system. Please rely on your own virus check. While reasonable efforts are made to ensure that e-mails are free from bugs or virus infection, no responsibility is taken by Johnsons Solicitors for any damage arising from any bug or virus infection The Metropolitan Police Service is here for London - on the streets and in your community, working with you to make our city safer. Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless absolutely necessary. NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). EFTA_R1_02033118 EFTA02691316

Technical Artifacts (5)

View in Artifacts Browser

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

Domainwww.iohnsonslaw.com
Phone2691314
Phone2691315
Phone2691316
URLhttp://www.sra.oro.uktrules

Related Documents (6)

Court UnsealedSep 9, 2019

Epstein Depositions

10. 11. 12. l3. 14. 16. 17. l8. 19. Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley J. Edwards, et Case No.: 50 2009 CA Attachments to Statement of Undisputed Facts Deposition of Jeffrey Epstein taken March 17, 2010 Deposition of Jane Doe taken March 11, 2010 (Pages 379, 380, 527, 564?67, 568) Deposition of LM. taken September 24, 2009 (Pages 73, 74, 164, 141, 605, 416) Deposition ofE.W. taken May 6, 2010 (1 15, 1.16, 255, 205, 215?216) Deposition of Jane Doe #4 (32-34, 136) Deposition of Jeffrey Eps

839p
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00028741

0p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01682184

186p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01579061

0p
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00031532

0p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA S 120 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x THE GOVERNMENT'S OMNIBUS MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO THE DEFENDANT'S PRE-TRIAL MOTIONS AUDREY STRAUSS United States Attorney Southern District of New York Attorney for the United States of America Assistant United States Attorneys - Of Counsel - EFTA00039421 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1 BACKGROUND 2 ARGUMENT 3 I. Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement Is Irrelevant to This Case 3 A. The NPA Does Not Bind the Southern District of New York 4 1. The Text of the Agreement Does Not Contain a Promise to Bind Other Districts 5 2. The Defendant Has Offered No Evidence That the NPA Binds Other Districts 9 B. The NPA Does Not Immunize Maxwell from Prosecution 15 1. The NPA Is Limited to Particular Crimes Between 2001 and 2007 15 2. The NPA Does Not Confer Enforceable Rights on Maxwell 17 C. The Defendant

239p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.