Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00161819DOJ Data Set 9Other

From: Igl

From: Igl IME> Subject: Fw: [EXTERNAL] from: Epstein's home Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 19:17:52 +0000 Importance: Normal / The New York Times; re: evidence seized from From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 2:02 PM To: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York limes; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home I think its best to just not comment. Id have to look up what our policy guide says on retention and id rather not get into it with him. From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 1:42 PM To: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York Times; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home I think the USAO is trying to humor him. Is it something we'd be able to answer in general, or you'd like me to just avoid it altogether. From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 1:39:41 PM To: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York limes; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home Why do we even need to provide him with that information? We had no comment on the fact check requ

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00161819
Pages
2
Persons
2
Integrity

Summary

From: Igl IME> Subject: Fw: [EXTERNAL] from: Epstein's home Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 19:17:52 +0000 Importance: Normal / The New York Times; re: evidence seized from From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 2:02 PM To: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York limes; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home I think its best to just not comment. Id have to look up what our policy guide says on retention and id rather not get into it with him. From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 1:42 PM To: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York Times; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home I think the USAO is trying to humor him. Is it something we'd be able to answer in general, or you'd like me to just avoid it altogether. From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 1:39:41 PM To: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York limes; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home Why do we even need to provide him with that information? We had no comment on the fact check requ

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Igl IME> Subject: Fw: [EXTERNAL] from: Epstein's home Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 19:17:52 +0000 Importance: Normal / The New York Times; re: evidence seized from From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 2:02 PM To: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York limes; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home I think its best to just not comment. Id have to look up what our policy guide says on retention and id rather not get into it with him. From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 1:42 PM To: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York Times; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home I think the USAO is trying to humor him. Is it something we'd be able to answer in general, or you'd like me to just avoid it altogether. From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 1:39:41 PM To: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York limes; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home Why do we even need to provide him with that information? We had no comment on the fact check request yesterday, should this be any different? LMK if you agree or disagree? Happy to speak if necessary. Thanks From: Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 1:28 PM To: Subject: Fwd: [EXTERNAL] from: / The New York limes; re: evidence seized from Epstein's home Seamus - see below? From: Blase, (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 1:22:10 PM To: Cc: Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - Fwd: [EXTERNAL] from: Epstein's home >; / The New York Times; re: evidence seized from Hey guys, would you be okay with us referring Colin to you on some of the process questions below? I think if you'd be able to give him the default retention policies for seized evidence in a criminal case, that would suffice. EFTA00161819 Just let me know. Thanks! Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Date: December 21 2021 at 12:24:54 PM EST To: " Subject: [EXTERNAL] from: home Reply-To: / The New York Times; re: evidence seized front Epstein's I'm writing about the search of Jeffrey Epstein's home on East 71st street and the CDs that were found there and which contained photographs. Some of the photos were introduced as evidence in Ghislaine Maxwell's trial. (I wrote a story about those that ran a few days ago.) An FBI agent, described the search of Epstein's Manhattan home in her testimony. And an analyst for the FBI, testified that about 38,000 images were found on the CDs located in that home. As you probably noticed, a defense lawyer, . brought up the unseen photos yesterday during her summation, speculating as to what they might depict. Can you tell me what the current status of the images found on the CDs is and what may become of them? I'd like to give the readers a sense of how the photos are seen by the government, whether as bits of evidence or a potential resource for potential future investigations or something else. And I'd like to let the readers know if they are being preserved by the U.S. attorney's office of the FBI and what happens ultimately with such images. I'm writing now and would appreciate your response. I can chat if that would be helpful but I would have to call you from the press room inside 500 Pearl Street. Regards, Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. EFTA00161820

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Wire Refreferring

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01905212

5p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01838551

1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

reached in this case, and other information in the possession of the victims, it is also possible that

reached in this case, and other information in the possession of the victims, it is also possible that other improper relationships exist between Government agents and Epstein. Please provide any documents, correspondence, and other information regarding the possibility of any improper relationship, including: a) involvement in and/or awareness of any aspect of the Government's criminal investigation and/or possible prosecution/non-prosecution of Epstein; b) Attorney liklimenvolvement in and/or awareness of the Government's interest."( witness, subject, or target of the Epstein investigation, including Sarah Ghislaine Maxwell, Nadia Marcinkova, Lesley Groff, [REDACTED - Survivor], Louella Ruboyo, Larry Morrison, Larry Visoki, David Rogers, William Hammond, and Robert Roxburgh; c) All documents, correspondence, and other information reflecting telephone calls (includin telephone logs and telephone billing statements) made by or received by m Jeffrey Epstein, the Florida Science

1p
Dept. of JusticeDec 19, 2025

GRAND JURY [EFTA00008998]

GRAND JURY EXHIBIT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. S1 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) COUNT ONE (Conspiracy to Entice Minors to Travel to Engage in Illegal Sex Acts) The Grand Jury charges: OVERVIEW The char...

1p
DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01682184

186p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Epstein Reputation Management Email Reveals Paid SEO/Hacking Campaign to Suppress Negative Coverage

The email provides concrete details about a paid operation to manipulate search results for Jeffrey Epstein, including payments, specific tactics, and references to high‑profile associates. It suggest Epstein hired a contractor (Mike) for $2,500 plus a pending $7,500 to run SEO and hacking services. The operation involved removing negative articles, altering Wikipedia, replacing mug‑shot images, a

3p

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.