Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00030689DOJ Data Set 8Correspondence

EFTA00030689

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 8
Reference
efta-efta00030689
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: ' To: ' )'' r <1 Subject: RE: updates Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 18:37:46 +0000 Also, thank you for putting this together! From: sc > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2019 2:07 PM To: (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) Subject: updates Below is a summary update you requested regarding the investigation of co-conspirators. This does not include everything the team is working on (for example, we have a list of legal research issues we are working through as we canvas charging theories), and we're assuming familiarity with our recent memorandum regarding potential co-conspirators. Please let us know if you need any additional information. On August 27th, the team met separately with and and are Victim-2 and Victim-3 in the Indictment. During the meetings, and both conveyed that they are willing to cooperate in an ongoing investigation. and have previously described as the individual through whom they scheduled all of their encounters with Epstein. On August 27th, the team met with who reported being sexually assaulted at several of Epstein's properties while she was an adult. described being recruited to perform massages for Epstein by Ghislaine Maxwell. indicated that she would cooperate with our ongoing investigation. On August 27th, the team interviewed who described being recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell and caused to engage in sexualized massage sessions with Epstein, during which she was sexually assaulted. These assaults occurred in London, Florida, the USVI, and New York, beginning when was 17 and continuing into her early twenties. These incidents occurred in the 1990s, before the sex trafficking statutes were enacted. indicated that she would cooperate with our ongoing investigation. On August 27th, the team met with M I . who has previously been interviewed and has described being sexually assaulted by Epstein at several of his properties when she was 17. has reported that was present during one of these encounters. has indicated that she will cooperate with our ongoing investigation. On August 29th, the team met with and who have each reported being sexually abused by Epstein while they were adults. We are in the process of scheduling an interview with EMI, who has accused Ghislaine Maxwell of being involved in her abuse. We anticipate that the interview will occur by videoconference, likely during the next two weeks. Next week, the team hopes to travel to Florida for two meetings, subject to weather issues arising from Hurricane Dorian. First, we hope to meet with (M) for a second proffer. worked as an assistant to Epstein in 2004, reporting to Her duties included scheduling two to three "massages" for Epstein each day he was in Florida. Second, we hope to meet with for a reverse proffer. When EFTA00030689 was 16, Epstein proposed that she recruit girls for him, and brought her young friends to Epstein for "massages" for several years. was granted immunity by SDFL and provided grand jury testimony, and we hope to pursue as a witness in this case. Our understanding is that coordinated appointments for the victims through On September 6th, we are scheduled to meet with defense counsel for an attorney proffer. On September 9th, we are scheduled to interview by videoconference. has accused Ghislaine Maxwell of recruiting her when she was 16. On September 16th, we are scheduled to interview who worked as Epstein's "house man" in New York for many years. To our knowledge, has never been interviewed before. During the week of September 16th, the team hopes to travel to California for several meetings. We hope to meet with a victim who is described in our previous memorandum regarding co-conspirators. We have previously interviewed , and we hope to discuss whether is willing to cooperate with our ongoing investigation. While we are in California, we also hope to schedule follow-up interviews with and described above. Assistant United States Attorney Southern District of New York One Saint Andrew's Plaza New York, NY 10007 EFTA00030690

Related Documents (6)

OtherUnknown

Subject:

From: To: Subject: - u is airs ews ne Ing e nes ay, u y 29, 2020 Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 10:25:50 +0000 c Importan e: Normal Mobile version and searchable archives available at fbi.bulletinintelligence.com. 1B1 News Briefing TO: THE DIRECTOR AND SENIOR STAFF DATE: WEDNESDAY, JULY 29, 2020 6:30 AM EDT TODAY'S TABLE OF CONTENTS LEADING THE NEWS • Barr Spars With Democrats At Contentious House Hearing. • Barr Says Democrats Have Tried To "Discredit" Him. • Barr Says Bash Investigating "High Number Of Unmaskings" During Obama Administration. PROTESTS • Memo Reveals Federal Agents Sought Role In Suppressing Protests Since Start. • New Mexico Governor Addresses Concerns About Federal Agents In Albuquerque. • Report: US, Oregon In Talks About Pulling Agents From Portland. • Portland Fines Federal Government For Unpermitted Fence Outside Courthouse. • US Park Police Head: Decision To Clear Protesters Not Linked To Trump "Photo Op." • Hundreds Of Cases Involving LAPD Off

47p
OtherUnknown

U.S. Department of Justice

U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of New York The Silvio J. Motto 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 on much of the proposed protective order. However, the parties

7p
OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' To:' 1111 Cc: ' >, Subject: Re: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 19:13:54 +0000 Importance: Normal and I just spoke. We are going to down and take a look at all digital evidence and get this squared away. I'm going to work on getting a large enough hard drive to dump the evidence on to get it to SDNY. From: Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 2:39 PM To: Cc: Subject: Fwd: RE: Epstein search warrant documents I know you already got this, just wanted to confer with you as to what is going on with all this. Feel like you, me, and need to chat and see what is what. I'm thinking that this started before the case took a turn yet is still moving in the same direction. In other words, do we really need to be doing this? Seems to me that I should be taking all my marching orders from and M. NY CART Coordinator Senior Forensic Examiner cell desk From: (USANYS)" Forwarded message Date: Jun 17, 2020 2:28 PM Subject: RE: Epstein search war

14p
OtherUnknown

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

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 0372112011 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 v. 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
House OversightUnknown

Defense Claims DOJ Official Misrepresented Deferred Prosecution Agreement Modifications in Epstein Case

Defense Claims DOJ Official Misrepresented Deferred Prosecution Agreement Modifications in Epstein Case The passage outlines a dispute over a purported modification to Jeffrey Epstein's Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) by U.S. Attorney Paul Acosta and SDFL prosecutor Michael Sloman. It suggests possible procedural misconduct or bad‑faith tactics by DOJ officials, which could be a concrete lead for further FOIA requests, interview of the attorneys involved, and review of the December 19, 2007 letter. While the actors are high‑profile (U.S. Attorney, federal prosecutors), the claim is not novel and lacks specific evidence of wrongdoing beyond contradictory statements, placing it in the strong‑lead range. Key insights: Sloman threatened to terminate the DPA unless Epstein complied with a 'unilateral modification' that defense says was never formally agreed to.; The defense asserts the December 19, 2007 letter from U.S. Attorney Acosta only proposed changes, which were rejected by defense counsel.; The SDFL allegedly refused to provide needed information for Epstein to meet the alleged new pleading and sentencing requirements.

1p
OtherUnknown

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.