Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00029177DOJ Data Set 8Correspondence

EFTA00029177

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 8
Reference
efta-efta00029177
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: "-(USANYS)" To: ' (USANYS)" Subject: RE: Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 19:57:53 +0000 What 302s does she come up in other than and and what is the context? From: (USANYS) Sent: Sunday, August 2, 2020 2:03 PM To: (USANYS) Subject: RE: One of the difficulties in answering this question is that we don't have the pros memo. Here's what I've been able to learn from what we do have: We do have the transcripts of their grand jury testimony (although not the AUSA preamble). She is not mentioned in the introductory part of the agent's testimony where they are walking through the various targets and subjects of the investigation. By contrast, Epstein, _-and -re (pp. 5-6). In fact, she only comes up once in the entire grand jury presentation, namely in the context of the agent's summary of how met Epstein. Specifically, the agent testifies as follows: I'm sorry, the question you asked me was: How did they meet? They met by a friend of Mr. Epstein's. Jane Doe Number One was working at Mar-a-Lago and a friend of Mr. Epstein's, Ghislaine Maxwell. Would you like the spelling? THE REPORTER: Yes, please. THE WITNESS: G-H-I-S-L-A-I-N-E, Maxwell, who was a friend of Mr. Epstein, met Jane Doe Number One at Mar-a-Lago and Jane Doe Number One soon after began working and providing massages for Mr. Epstein The fact that she has to spell it strongly suggests the name also didn't come up during whatever preamble the AUSA provided. But either way, that's it. As you know, she is not mentioned in the NPA and, according the lawyer at OPR who is running the NPA investigation, Maxwell does not come up much, if at all, in the documents they have reviewed in connection with that issue. There were no federal search warrants, so there would be no applications in which target subjects would be identified. There was a local search warrant, but we don't have a copy because we don't have the SDFL file and we haven't asked Palm Beach county for theirs. Presumably we will get that at some point. Maxwell was added to the caption of the FBI file at some point, and she does come up in some of the 302s (including the and gl nterviews in a manner we're now familiar with). That said, we have the FBI file, including all of their 302s, and we plan to produce those. I think the proposal to get the physical file from SDFL makes sense and is manageable. We'll have to work through how to do that, but OPR has at least some of that material which we could get quickly and start with (including the pros memo), and once we figure out how to get the rest, 24 boxes of material is a doable project. From: (USANYS) Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 3:17 PM EFTA00029177 To: Subject: RE: (USANYS) Thanks — yes, having an understanding of how (if at all) Maxwell fits into the Florida evidence and investigation (beyond just the simple view that she wasn't the focus) would be helpful. From: (USANYS) < Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 11:14 AM To: (USANYS) Subject: RE: Asking the team to look into this. We don't have their pros memo (although OPR does and if we wanted to make a more targeted ask, we could conceivably start with that). We do have the one (state) search warrant application for the Palm Beach residence, team will check that now. Team is not aware of any other search warrant applications done as part of the SDFL investigation, but will take a look to confirm. We also have the grand jury testimony and I'm asking team to confirm that Maxwell was not mentioned in that testimony. From: (USANYS) Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 10:55 AM To: (USANYS) Subject: Do you know, or can you find out, whether Maxwell was identified as a target / subject / target subject or whatever the lingo may have been in any warrants or other materials from the SDFL case, to the extent we know? Counsel to the Acting U.S. Attorney United States Attorney's Office Southern District of New York EFTA00029178

Related Documents (6)

Court UnsealedJun 16, 2023

Deutsche Bank Epstein victim questionnaire

EXHIBIT A-1 Case 1:22-cv-10018-JSR Document 90-2 Filed 06/16/23 Page 1 of 12 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Case No. 1:22-CV-10018 (JSR) NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION TO: ALL VICTIMS OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN’S SEX TRAFFICKING VENTURE DURING THE TIME PERIOD AUGUST 19, 2013 TO AUGUST 10, 2019 (THE “CLASS PERIOD”). IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR A SETTLEMENT PAYMENT, YOU (OR CLASS COUNSEL ON YOUR BEHALF) MUST TIMELY SUBMIT A TIER ONE FORM BY ___________, 20

12p
Court UnsealedMar 17, 2016

Usg-Lavabit-Unsealed

U.S. District Court Eastern District of Virginia - (Alexandria) CRIMINAL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:13-sw-00522-CMH-1 Case title: USA v. In Re: Information Associated Date Filed: 07/16/2013 Date Terminated: 03/24/2015 with [Redacted] Assigned to: District Judge Claude M. Hilton Appeals court case number: 13-4625 Defendant (1) In Re: Information Associated with [Redacted] TERMINATED: 03/24/2015 Pending Counts Disposition None Highest Offense Level (Opening) None Terminated Counts Disposition None

560p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 0372172011 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 1. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR ORDER DIRECTING THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NOT TO WITHHOLD RELEVANT EVIDENCE COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to move for an order from this Court directing the U.S. Attorney's Office not to suppress material evidence relevant to this case. The Court should enter an order, as it would in other criminal or civil cases, requiring the Government to make appropriate production of such evidence to the victims. BACKGROUND In discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office about this case, counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 inquired about whether the Office would voluntarily provide to the victims information in its possession that was mater

15p
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00016005

0p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01660111

0p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 013-80736-Civ-Marra/Nlatthewman JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. DECLARATION OF IN SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE AND OPPOSITION TO PETITIONERS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. I also am admitted to practice in all courts of the states of Minnesota and Florida, the Eighth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of Florida, the District of Minnesota, and the Northern District of California. My bar admission status in California and Minnesota is currently inactive. I am currently employed as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida and was so employed during all of the events described herein. 2. I am the Assistant United States Attorne

5p

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.