Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00023817DOJ Data Set 8Correspondence

EFTA00023817

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 8
Reference
efta-efta00023817
Pages
0
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available
Loading PDF viewer...

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: ' cti To: Jennifer Richardson , Gary Bloxsome Cc: Daniel Cundy , ' " Subject: RE: Sensitive Correspondence Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2020 14:44:48 +0000 Inline-Images: image001.jpg; image002.jpg Jen, Confirmed, thank you — we look forward to speaking with you shortly. Best, From: Jennifer Richardson Sent: Monday, August 03, 2020 10:37 To: I ; Gary Bloxsome Cc: Daniel Cundy ; Subject: RE: Sensitive Correspondence Dear Just confirming dial in details for our 4pm teleconference as follows: 1. Dial-in number(s): 2. Enter Guest PIN: Kind regards Jen Jennifer Richardson I Solicitor-Advocate Blackfords LLP I www.blackfords.com RANKED IN • Chambers UK a 4. 0 9 020%s ivalinotkin 300 TOP TIER 2020 COVID-19 — Please see our websiteherefor our updated position in relation to Coronavirus. In the meantime if you need to speak to one of our lawyers, please leave a voicemail by dialling where we will respond to the messages in the order they are received or by emailing your enquiry to mited liability partnership registered in England & Wales with registered number A list of members' names is available at this 2 WAV we handle personal data can be found in o. Privacy Statement Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 462078. From: Sent: 31 July 2020 19:53 To: Gary Bloxsome Cc: Daniel Cundy • Jennifer Richardson c ; Moe, c M> EFTA00023817 Alison (USANYS) < ; Subject: RE: Sensitive Correspondence External email: is it safe to open attachments and links? Gary, Thank you for your email below, which we have received. We will confer on these issues and we look forward to speaking again on Monday. Regards, Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of New York From: Gary Bloxsome Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 12:14 To: Cc: Daniel Cundy >; Subject: Re: Sensitive Correspondence Dear`. Thank you for your emoils of 28th and 20 July 2020. In relation to protections equivalent to those that would be available in any compelled MLAT interview, we would seek to secure the following from you; (.1] An undertaking that the evidence obtained from our client pursuant to the agreement will not be used for any purpose other than that specified in the agreement namely, the proceedings on indictment in US v Maxwell, without the consent of our client and; (2) An undertaking that the answers to questions, statements, or information given by the client in o voluntary interview conducted with the DOJ, shall not be used in evidence against the client, except os against the client for possible prosecution in the UK for providing false or misleading statements or where the client, in giving evidence in o prosecution for some other offense, provides testimony inconsistent with his responses given in the voluntary interview, pursuant to the agreement. Kind regards and speak on Monday. Gary !c > ) • Jennifer Richardson Gary Bloxsome I Partner a RANKED IN A t vtl. 1 1 0 ,aamRFS • Blackfords LIP I lb IN S 4s. 4. 0 1 0 1 0 V ill1 www.blackfords.com Ivading15,111 .400 10P Ill COVID-19 — Please see our websiteherefor our updated position in relation to Coronavirus. In the meantime if you need to speak to one of our lawyers, please leave a voicemail by dialling where we will respond to the messages in the order they are received or by emailing your enquiry to Blackfords LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England & Wales with registered number A list of members' names is available at this a :fc GDPR: details of how we handle personal data can be found in oLrPrivacy Statement Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 462078. EFTA00023818 On 29 Jul 2020, at 20:19,1 wrote: External email: is it safe to open attachments and links? Gary, A brief update to the below information — I should have included the specific jury instruction elements for 18 U.S.C. 1001, subsection (2), which likely would be more applicable to a prosecution based on a proffer statement. Although the knowing and willful element in particular is identical, we nevertheless wanted to provide this to you as well. Pursuant to Sand, Modern Federal Jury Instructions, Instruction 36-9 (Elements of the Offense), those elements are: First, on or about the date specified, the defendant made a statement or representation; Second, that this statement or representation was material; Third, the statement or representation was false, fictitious or fraudulent; Fourth, the false, fictitious or fraudulent statement was made knowingly and willfully; and Fifth, the statement or representation was made in a matter within the jurisdiction of the government of the United States (or federal funds were involved). Regards, Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of New York From: Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 18:29 To: Gary Bloxsome Cc: Daniel Cundy Subject: RE: Sensitive Correspondence Gary, We write to follow up on our conversation yesterday, to confirm certain aspects of our discussion and to provide certain information you requested. First, thank you for conveying your questions, and I hope our initial responses were of some use. To provide additional information that may be helpful, attached please find a blank proffer agreement, which is our standard form agreement for proffer interviews, as you requested. Please note that in addition to the provisions I briefly described on our call, there are also provisions that may not be relevant to your client. We nevertheless send the complete agreement for your review. Additionally, and also as requested, certain information relating to Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001, is provided below. In relevant part, that statute states the following: "Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully-(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry [is guilty of an offense]. The full language of the statute is also available here. Regarding the elements required to prove such an offense, pursuant to Sand, Modern Federal Jury Instructions, Instruction 36-3 (Elements of the Offense), a conviction for this offense require that the following elements each must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that on or about the date specified in the indictment, the defendant falsified (or concealed or covered up) a material fact; Second, that the fact falsified (or concealed or covered up) was material; Third, that defendant did so by trick, scheme or device; Fourth, that defendant acted knowingly and willfully; and ; Jennifer Richardson < EFTA00023819 Fifth, that the falsification, concealment or coverup was with respect to a matter within the jurisdiction of the government of the United States (if applicable: or that federal funds were involved). You may note in particular the inclusion of the "knowingly and willfully" requirement, as we discussed. We also understand that you will send us, to the extent you believe it is relevant or helpful for our consideration, any particular provisions or protections contemplated under the MLAT process, and which of those, if any, you believe are relevant, or should be applicable, to a voluntary interview. We look forward to speaking with you again this coming Monday, August 3, at 4:00 p.m. (LDN time), and we further confirm, as discussed, that our Office is prepared to extend the Negotiation Period, referenced in our email of July 14, 2020, for two weeks from our call yesterday, to August 10, 2020, under the terms previously mutually agreed upon. Regards, Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of New York EFTA00023820

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01654086

0p
Court UnsealedJul 21, 2020

Letter Motion

Letter Motion, USA v. Maxwell, No. 1:20-cr-00330-1 (S.D.N.Y. Jul 21, 2020)

7p
Court UnsealedAug 19, 2019

Letter Motion

Letter Motion, USA v. Epstein, No. 1:19-cr-00490-1 (S.D.N.Y. Aug 19, 2019)

3p
Court UnsealedCorrespondenceUnknown

Court filings and letters: 30

The documents include a letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding Jeffrey Epstein's foreign passport and court filings related to Ghislaine Maxwell's case, focusing on disputes over discovery materials and the disclosure of alleged victims' identities.

8p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 33 Filed 07/28/20 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 33 Filed 07/28/20 Page 1 of 7 U.S. Department of Justice United Stales Attorney Southern District of New York The Silvio J. Mollo Building One saint Andrew's Plaza New York. New York 10007 July 28, 2020 VIA ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Dear Judge Nathan: The Government respectfully submits this letter with respect to the protective order to be entered in the above-captioned case, and to respond to the defendant's letter and submission of July 27, 2020 (the "Defendant Letter" or "Def. Ltr.") (Dkt. 29). The Government and defense counsel have conferred regarding a protective order several times via telephone and email between July 9, 2020, and today, including as recently as this morning. The Government and defense counsel have come to an agreement

19p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Filing: 32

The document includes a letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office requesting time to respond to a defense motion for a protective order in the Ghislaine Maxwell case, and a court decision regarding Jeffrey Epstein's bail, discussing the charges against him and the reasoning behind the court's decision to remand him.

34p

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.