Case File
efta-efta00011026DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceEFTA00011026
Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 8
Reference
efta-efta00011026
Pages
0
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available
Loading PDF viewer...
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureText extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 56 Filed 09/04/19 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE
500 PEARL STREET
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10007
(212)1308-0715
CHAMBERS OF
RICHARD M. BERMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Bruce A. Green
Louis Stein Chair
Fordharn University School of Law
150 West 62"d Street
Room 7-168
New York City, NY 10023
Dear Professor Green,
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC It:
DATE FILED: I
September 4, 2019
Thank you for your letter of August 30, 2019. I appreciate your taking the time to clarify
the record.
I learned that you had been "retained to provide opinions as an expert on legal ethics" in
v. Dershowitz following the August 27, 2019 public hearing in US v. Epstein. I learned
of your role in theaase
by reading your affidavit, dated June 7, 2019, which includes
your legal ethics opinion that David Boies should be disqualified from representing Ms.
in that matter. As you are aware, both Mr. Boles and Ms.
were invited to testify at the
August 27, 2019 hearing.
I remain surprised that your advocacy of Mr. Boles' disqualification from representing
Ms. Guiffre (in a case obviously related to US v. Epstein) was not disclosed simultaneously with
your August 26, 2019 Law Journal opinion piece entitled "The Judge in Epstein's Case Should
Not Tum the Dismissal Into a Drama for the Victims." I am also surprised that you would find
the August 27, 2019 public hearing to be an inappropriate occasion for transparency in light of
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 57 and the Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771.
You wrote: "This is an odd moment for transparency in a criminal case."
1
EFTA00011026
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 56 Filed 09/04/19 Page 2 of 2
Finally, it is unfortunate that your opinion piece may have been construed as an effort to
chill Ms. a
and Mr. Boies' right to be heard under 18 U.S.C. § 3771 at the August 27,
2019 public hearing. You wrote: "[W]hatever informational interests the victims may have
would be served by affording them a chance to attend the hearing, not by giving them a speaking
role."
Sincerely.
Richard M. Berman
U.S.D.J.
cc:
AU
Martin G. Weinberg, Esq.;
Reid Weingarten, Esq.; David Boies, Esq.
2
EFTA00011027
Related Documents (6)
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA00011025
0p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown
EFTA01681953
2p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01681953
0p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA Document EFTA01687991
0p
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown
EFTA00019994
0p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown
EFTA01687991
76p
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.