Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00090538DOJ Data Set 9Other

Subject: Fwd: From Andrew's PR team

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00090538
Pages
3
Persons
5
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

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

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009
Ask AI about this document

Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
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 provide cooperation to the US authorities regarding the victims of the late Jeffrey Epstein, should those authorities request his assistance. The working group is supported by Riverside Advisory on media relations. To date, we have chosen not to make any public statement regarding our discussions with the US Department of Justice (DOJ). Our commitment to confidentiality is not only regarded as best practice in the UK but is also intended to respect the DOJ's commitment to confidentiality, as set out in its own rules as they apply to discussions with potential witnesses. However, in view of misleading media briefings, we owe it to our client to issue this clarifying statement. As the public record indicates the DOJ has been actively investigating Mr Epstein and other targets for more than 16 years, yet the first time they requested the Duke's help was on 2"d January 2020. Importantly, the DOJ advised us that the Duke is not and has never been a 'target' of their criminal investigations into Epstein and that they sought his confidential, voluntary co-operation. In the course of these discussions, we asked the DOJ to confirm that our co-operation and any interview arrangements would remain confidential, in accordance with the ordinary rules that apply to voluntary co-operation with the DOJ. We were given an unequivocal assurance that our discussions and the interview process would remain confidential. The Duke of York has on at least three occasions this year offered his assistance as a witness to the DOJ. Unfortunately, the DOJ has reacted to the first two offers by breaching their own confidentiality rules and claiming that the Duke has offered zero cooperation. In doing so, they are perhaps seeking publicity rather than accepting the assistance proffered. On 27t" January 2020, Mr Geoffrey S Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, chose to make a public statement about the Duke. This led to worldwide media reports that there had been "a wall of silence" and that there had been "zero co-operation" by the Duke. These statements were inaccurate, and they should not have been made. On 9th March 2020, Mr Berman made further public statements saying that the Duke had "completely shut the door" on cooperating with the US investigation and that they are now "considering" further options. Again, the first statement was inaccurate and should not have been made. EFTA00090539 It is a matter of regret that the DOJ has seen fit to breach its own rules of confidentiality, not least as they are designed to encourage witness cooperation. Far from our client acting above the law, as has been implied by press briefings in the US, he is being treated by a lower standard than might reasonably be expected for any other citizen. Further, those same breaches of confidentiality by the DOJ have given the global media - and, therefore, the worldwide audience - an entirely misleading account of our discussions with them. Any pursuit of an application for mutual legal assistance would be disappointing, since the Duke of York is not a target of the DOJ investigation and has recently repeated his willingness to provide a witness statement. It is hoped that this third offer has not been the cause of the most recent leak about the Duke of York. We do not intend to make any further public statement at this time as we wish to respect the rules of confidentiality under both English law and the US guidelines. ENDS NOTES TO EDITORS The case is being handled by Blackfords City office FOR MORE INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT RIVERSIDE ADVISORY Mark.gallagherlariversideadvisory.co.uk — tel: +44 7968 939291 [email protected] — tel: + 44 7961 452558 Daniel Bates Journalist in New York www.danielgbates.com EFTA00090540

Related Documents (6)

House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

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

87p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

64p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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."

32p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

20p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

54p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs I UNITED STATES, Defendants JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO THE GOVERNMENT REGARDING QUESTIONS RELEVANT TO THEIR PENDING ACTION CONCERNING THE CRIME VICTIMS RIGHTS ACT COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 ("the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, and request the defendant United States (hereinafter "the Government") to admit or deny the following facts: BACKGROUND As the Government will recall, the victims have asked the Government to stipulate to undisputed facts in this case. The Government has declined. Accordingly, the victims filed their Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act and Request for a Hearing on Appropriate Remedies (DE 48) (the victims' "summary judgment motion") along with a Motion to Have Their Facts Accepted Because of the Government's Failure to Cont

8p

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.