Geoffrey S. Berman
Summary
Geoffrey S. Berman United States Attorney Southern District of New York METROPOLITAN POLICE Deputy Assistant Commissioner Specialist Operations Headquarters New Scotland Yard 1- 8 Richmond Terrace Victoria Embankment London SW1A Telephone: 0207 230 6801 Email: Reference: 53/DACSO/2019/RW 11th December 2019 PLEASE NOTE AMENDMENT BELOW AND DISREGARD LETTER SENT 9T" DECEMBER 2019 Dear Mr. Berman, I am writing regarding your investigation into the allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse by Jeffrey Epstein as detailed in the case of United States v. Jeffrey Espstein, 19 Cr. 490 (RMB). I have been advised that US Embassy representatives in London have made contact with Metropolitan Police Colleagues on your behalf, requesting the contact details for the solicitor for HRH The Duke of York, Prince Andrew. These contact details are: Gary Bloxsome Blackfords LLP 15 Old Bailey London EC4M 7EF The above is supplied for your information. Yours sincerely, Deputy Ass
Persons Referenced (4)
Tags
Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureRelated Documents (6)
Virginia Roberts v. Alan Dershowitz – Allegations of Sex Trafficking, NPA Manipulation, and Defamation
The complaint provides a dense web of alleged connections between Alan Dershowitz, Jeffrey Epstein, former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, and the 2008 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA). It cites specif Roberts alleges she was trafficked by Epstein from 2000‑2002 and forced to have sex with Dershowitz. Dershowitz is accused of helping draft and pressure the government into the 2008 NPA that shielded
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/08/2011 Page 1 of 54
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 62 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/08/2011 Page 1 of 54 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR FINDING OF VIOLATIONS OF THE CRIME VICTIM RIGHTS ACT AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING ON APPROPRIATE REMEDIES Respondent, United States of America, by and through its undersigned counsel, files its Response to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims Rights Act and Request for a Hearing on Appropriate Remedies, and states: I. INTRODUCTION The issue before this Court is whether the petitioners, Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2, had any rights under 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a), in the absence of a criminal charge being filed in the Southern District of Florida, charging someone with the commission of a federal crime in which petitione
Subject: SDNY News Clips Tuesday, July 9, 2019
From: Cc: Bcc Subject: SDNY News Clips Tuesday, July 9, 2019 Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 21:12:37 +0000 Importance: Normal Attachments: 2019_7-9.pdf SDNY News Clips Tuesday, July 9, 2019 EFTA00076625 Contents Public Corruption Epstein Complex Frauds lure Terrorism & Narcotics Wise Honest Matters of Interest Trump Can't Block Twitter Followers US Appeals Court Rules Judicial Review of Claims of Government Misconduct in Parallel Investigations Barr Says Legal Path to Census Citizenship Question Exists but He Gives No Details Public Corruption Epstein Who Protected Jeffrey Epstein? New York Times By The Editorial Board 7/8/19 On Monday, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York unsealed a 14-page indictment against Jeffrey Epstein, charging the wealthy financier with operating and conspiring to operate a sex trafficking ring of girls out of his luxe homes on Manhattan's Upper East Side and in Palm Beach, Fla., "among other locations."
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 9:08-ev-80736-Civ-ICAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2 I UNITED STATES JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER COME NOW Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to file this response in opposition to Epstein's Motion for a Protective Confidentiality Order (DE 247). Epstein's motion is a thinly-disguised attempt to relitigate issues already covered by the court's earlier ruling eleven months ago (DE 188), which allowed the victims to file correspondence relating to Epstein's non-prosecution agreement in the public court file. Rather than reverse its previous ruling, this Court should reaffirm it — and allow the important issues presented by this case to be litigated in the light of day. BACKGROUND Because of Epstein's penchant for relitigating issues that have already been decided, it
Subject: Fwd: From Andrew's PR team
From: To: Subject: Fwd: From Andrew's PR team Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2020 15:28:33 +0000 Inline-Images: image001.jpg Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: daniel bates Date: June S. 2020 at 10:39:03 AM EDT To: ' Subject: Front Andrew's PR team This has just been released. Please note the line about them making three offers to be a witness, which flatly contradicts Mr Berman's public comments. Is it right you are treating Prince Andrew with a 'lower standard' than other people? And can you clarify if you want to speak to him as a suspect or a witness? If you want to call me I'm am happy to chat on background but we will need something on the record for the Daily Mail. Regards Daniel BL CKFOR DSLL, EFTA00090538 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE —JUNE 8TH, 2020 Statement regarding HRH The Duke of York In January 2020, Blaekfords LLP and instructed counsel, Clare Montgomery QC and Stephen Ferguson, were commissioned to support HRH The Duke of York in his desire to prov
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 1 of 64
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 1 of 64 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE No. 1 and JANE DOE No. 2 v. UNITED STATES AFFIDAVIT OF BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQ. REGARDING NEED FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 1. I, Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. Along with co-counsel, I represent Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 (as referred to as "the victims") in the above-listed action to enforce their rights under the Crime Victims Rights Act (CVRA). I also represented them (and several other victims) in civil suits against Jeffrey Epstein for sexually abusing them. I am also familiar with the criminal justice system, having served as state prosecutor in the Broward County State Attorney's Office. 2. This affidavit covers factual issues regarding the Government's assertions of privilege to more tha
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.