Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00099906DOJ Data Set 9Other

(USANYS)"

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00099906
Pages
4
Persons
5
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

From: To: Cc: (USANYS)" r Subject: Re: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 03:06:18 +0000 No issues from me. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 30, 2020, at 9:38 PM, This seems fine to me. On Dec 30, 2020, at 7:38 PM, (USANYS) < > wrote: ) < > wrote: This all appears accurate to me and seems fine to file. Any issues from your perspective? From: (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 5:29 PM To: (USANYS) <I > (USANYS) <a°; (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) < > (USANYS) > (USANYS) 1 <->; (USANYS) >; (USANYS) < > Subject: FW: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Hey everyone: Here's the latest draft of our letter and declaration on this issue. We are still confirming a few things, but they shouldn't impact the substance of the Maxwell discussion. There is also a chance that there's a separate declaration from the MDC; if there is, it sho

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: Cc: (USANYS)" r Subject: Re: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 03:06:18 +0000 No issues from me. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 30, 2020, at 9:38 PM, This seems fine to me. On Dec 30, 2020, at 7:38 PM, (USANYS) < > wrote: ) < > wrote: This all appears accurate to me and seems fine to file. Any issues from your perspective? From: (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 5:29 PM To: (USANYS) <I > (USANYS) <a°; (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) < > (USANYS) > (USANYS) 1 <->; (USANYS) >; (USANYS) < > Subject: FW: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Hey everyone: Here's the latest draft of our letter and declaration on this issue. We are still confirming a few things, but they shouldn't impact the substance of the Maxwell discussion. There is also a chance that there's a separate declaration from the MDC; if there is, it should contain the same substance re: Maxwell that's in the attached draft. Our response is due tomorrow. I'm generally around later this evening or tomorrow if there's anything you'd like to discuss. Thanks very much. From: (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 2:40 PM To: (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) < >; (USANYS) EFTA00099906 Cc: (USANYS) < (USANYS) (USANYS) < >; (USANYS) >; (USANYS) 1 I Subject: RE: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera We are in the process of finalizing our response to the Maxwell/Rivera issue. We intend to explain that the discovery and counsel access accommodations that have been provided to Maxwell and Rivera, respectively, result from the specific circumstances of their cases, the specific requests of their lawyers, and their individual housing circumstances. On all of these factors, there are several important differences, including: The Maxwell case has multiple times more discovery than the Rivera case. Hence, the need for such expanded discovery access is greater in the Maxwell case. At the MDC, Maxwell has a unique housing situation, as she is in protective custody outside the general population. She therefore has sole access to a room to use a computer and phone for approximately 13 hours a day. Rivera, by contrast, is housed in the general population. There are approximately 8o other inmates at the MCC in Rivera's unit that use the same VTC room for court appearances, probation interviews, and attorney meetings. By contrast, Maxwell shares access to the MDC VTC room with substantially fewer inmates. The MDC can therefore provide 15 hours of VTC meetings with her attorneys without compromising access for other MDC inmates. The same is not true for Rivera at the MCC. Going forward, even though Rivera's counsel have asked (and the Court has ordered) that Rivera receive three hours of laptop access each day, the MCC is now leaving the laptop with him all day long, and only takes it back at night to charge it. Therefore, the MCC is now providing the same amount of electronic discovery access to Rivera that Maxwell receives at the MDC. As for providing Rivera with up to 15 hours of VTC access, we will explain that doing so will compromise access for other inmates. If defense counsel expresses a need for additional time, the MCC will continue to find ways to accommodate those requests as best as they can. Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss this further. Best, From: (USANYS) Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 4:42 PM To: (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) < ; (USANYS) wc >; (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) < (USANYS) (USANYS) < >; (USANYS) >; (USANYS) 1 Subject: RE: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Thanks, Can you keep me posted on what we think will be the substance of the draft declaration when you know (that is, before we are submitting anything on 12/31)? And how much of this is attributable to differences between MCC and MDC, as well as specific differences in their housing situations? From: (USANYS) Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 4:35 PM EFTA00099907 To: (USANYS) c > (USANYS) >; (USANYS) (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS).c ; (USANYS) O .; (USANYS)O (USANYS) (USANYS) 1 c: Subject: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera All: (USANYS) I wanted to bring to your attention a recent issue that's surfaced in United States v. Rivera et al., a sex trafficking case pending before Judge Engelmayer. As I'll describe in more detail below, Judge Engelmayer has asked us to submit a declaration from the BOP explaining why the discovery and counsel access accommodations provided to Ghislaine Maxwell (detained at the MDC outside the general population) cannot be extended to Justin Rivera (detained at the MCC in the general population). Justin Rivera was charged in February 2019 with sex trafficking conspiracy. He's been detained at the MCC since April 2019 on consent (he's also serving a state sentence). His trial, which was originally scheduled for April 2019, is expected to start on February 16, 2020. In July 2020, he had new counsel appointed, citing an irreconcilable breakdown with his former counsel. Since this fall, Judge Engelmayer has become increasingly frustrated with the MCC's treatment of Rivera. In particular, he's cited their failure to provide Rivera with adequate accommodations to review discovery and meet with his lawyers, who refuse to visit Rivera at the MCC for personal health concerns. We have two court orders in place to address these issues: (1) a laptop order, which requires the MCC to provide Rivera access to a laptop for three hours per day; and (2) a videoconference order, which requires the MCC to make available four hours of videoconferencing each week, in addition to any telephone or videoconference calls obtained through the Federal Defenders. At the moment, there's not a concern, at least from Judge Engelmayer, that the amount of time Rivera has for videoconferences and electronic discovery review is insufficient for trial preparation, although defense counsel has stated that they may request more time in the future. However, in a letter last night and during a court conference this morning (transcript attached), defense counsel cited the accommodations that the MDC has provided to Maxwell, describing them as "strikingly different and far superior" to those afforded to Rivera. Defense counsel further suggested that Rivera was being treated differently on account of his race, gender and class. Judge Engelmayer stated that the disparity in access "jumped off the page" and that the optics were "terrible," and asked us to explain the rationale for the differing treatment. After conferring with and before our conference, we explained our understanding that the disparity comes down to the fact that Maxwell and Rivera have very different housing situations, with Maxwell's situation being more amenable to greater access to electronic discovery review and legal visits. Judge Engelmayer asked us to submit a declaration, from an appropriate person at the BOP, explaining in more detail why the accommodations provided to Maxwell cannot be extended to Rivera. Based on the recent bail opposition in the Maxwell case, I believe the differences in counsel/discovery access are as follows: Accommodation \Iaxwell Rivera EFTA00099908 Review of electronic discovery (NB: each defendant has laptop access) 13 hours per day/7 days per week (91 hours total) 3 hours per day/7 days per week (21 hours total) Counsel visits (by video) 3 hours per day/5 days per week (15 hours total) Four hours per week (plus an additional two hours scheduled through the Federal Defenders) (6 hours total) Weekend legal calls As needed Not available The declaration is due by December 31. Because Judge Engelmayer's request implicates at least two criminal cases, and potentially the ongoing civil litigation with the MCC, we wanted to make sure that you were all aware of this issue. We are also happy to set up a call to discuss this further. In the meantime, we are working with to identify the appropriate declarant and draft an explanation for the Court. Best, Bhaskaran Assistant United States Attorney United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York One Saint Andrew's Plaza New York NY moor Tel: <2020.12.31 Letter on Rivera and Maxwell discovery and counsel access (v.2).docx> <2020.12.3necl re Rivera and Maxwell (v.3).docx> EFTA00099909

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' (USANYS)" To: (USANYS)" Subject: FW: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 19:03:11 +0000 Attachments: 2020.12.31_ Decl_re_Maxwell_(v.2).docx; 2020.12.31 on_Rivera_and_Maxwell_discovety_and_counsel_access_(v.3).docx; 2020.12.31 iecl_Re_Rivera_(v.2).docx I am sure you are swamped with pre-holiday craziness, so just wanted to flag that re: the below, our BOP contacts are eager to head out (and we have asked them to stay until this is filed in case there are any changes). So if there is any way to bump this up the list a bit it would help keep the peace. Thanksl From: (USANYS) Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2020 12:19 PM To: (USANYS) < :›; (USANYS) (USANYS) < (USANYS) < >; •c• ==.; Cc: (USANYS) ).; <1. ›;-(USANYS)1 < > Subject: RE: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) Hi Please see our propose

5p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' To: ' (USANYS)" Subject: RE: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:57:54 +0000 Thanks . Would it be possible to clarify that although Maxwell has access to a social phone, she has the same limited number of minutes for social calls per month as all other inmates? I just don't want to give the misimpression that Maxwell gets extra time for social calls. From: (USANYS) Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2020 11:27 AM To: (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) ca; (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) 1 < (USANYS) ; (USANYS) Subject: RE: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera (USANYS) Thanks, I have incorporated your edits and comments. >; Also, an update. There will be a separate declaration on Maxwell, which I have attached here. The substance is the same as before, with one minor exception — it clarifies that Maxwell has daily access to a social telephone. From: (

5p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' r To: ' " •cl (USANYS)" Subject: FW: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 00:38:23 +0000 r Attachments: 2020.12.31 tt S r on_Rivera_and_Maxwell_discovery_and_counsel_access_(v.2).docx; 2020.12.31 ecl re Rivera and_ Maxwell Jv.3).docx _ This all appears accurate to me and seems fine to file. Any issues from your perspective? From: (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 5:29 PM To: (USANYS) <IM ; (USANYS) ) (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) ; (USANYS) -(USANYS)1 (USANYS) (USANYS) Subject: FW: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Hey everyone: Here's the latest draft of our letter and declaration on this issue. We are still confirming a few things, but they shouldn't impact the substance of the Maxwell discussion. There is also a chance that there's a separate declaration from the MDC; if there is, it should contain the same substance

4p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: "-(USANYS)"

From: "-(USANYS)" To: " SANYS Cc: (USANYS)" (USAN YS)" SANYS USANYS)" (USANYS) 1" Subject: RE: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 21:23:34 +0000 la who is the Associate Warden at the MCC. There's a possibility that there will be a very short declaration from someone at the MDC to discuss the specific accommodations for Maxwell. I am working through that with From: (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 2:45 PM To: (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS)<Ma; (USANYS) ) Cc: (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) >; (USANYS) c En; (USANYS) 1 Subject: RE: Disparities in Counsel and Discovery Access for Ghislaine Maxwell and Justin Rivera Thanks. Who is signing the declaration for BOP? From: (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 2:40 PM To: (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) it ›; (USANYS) (USANYS) > (USANYS) Cc: (USANYS) (USANYS) (USANYS) ; (USANYS) <1. ›; (USANYS) 1 Subject: RE: Disparitie

4p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: RE: Notification - Pretrial Services Intake

From: " To: Subject: RE: Notification - Pretrial Services Intake Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2020 14:11:09 +0000 Hi Hope you're doing well. Following up on our conversation from the other day, do you know yet who the assigned officer will be? Thanks, • • From: Sent: orirst, 20 8:45 PM To: Subject: Re: Notification - Pretrial Services Intake I'll call you now .S. Pretnal Services > On Jul 6, 2020, at 8:43 PM, == ) < 1=1.> wrote: > No worries at all— happy to do whichever is easiest for you. Would you prefer to speak this evening, or is tomorrow morning more convenient? Thanks! > Sent from my iPhone >> On Jul 6, 2020, at 8:40 PM, wrote: > I'm sorry I couldn't call earlier. I can speak now for a few minutes or try you first thing in the morning. Let me know what works best. >> U.S. Pretrial Services >>> On Jul 6, 2020, at 5:50 PM, == ) <ta wrote: >>> >» Hi >>> >>> Thanks very much -- is there a particular time you'd like to speak this evening? EFTA00102394 >» >»

4p

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.