Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00174298DOJ Data Set 9Other

Subject: RE:

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00174298
Pages
3
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

From: To: Subject: RE: TIR /Hamilton TIR Feedback --- UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 14:24:40 +0000 Importance: Normal Priority: normal Attachments: docx; Roderic_Alexander_In_Hamilton_TIR_1.14.22_(002).docx Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//F0U0 Yes, all products get peer reviewed. That was why at our last meeting I asked everyone to add the peer reviewer to the email when you send the products to me or it would get sent back. I only started sending them back last week. However, I have taken a look at this one anyway in comparison to the Roderic Hamilton TIR, so these two don't worry about it. But in future please have someone peer review them before sending them to me. Hamilton TIR Feedback • Needs work or needs to be combined with others. There is not enough in this TIR to justify a key findings TIR. It is just simply a summary of your database results. You could not find a connection the subject or derogatory information and you should have at least one.

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: RE: TIR /Hamilton TIR Feedback --- UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 14:24:40 +0000 Importance: Normal Priority: normal Attachments: docx; Roderic_Alexander_In_Hamilton_TIR_1.14.22_(002).docx Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//F0U0 Yes, all products get peer reviewed. That was why at our last meeting I asked everyone to add the peer reviewer to the email when you send the products to me or it would get sent back. I only started sending them back last week. However, I have taken a look at this one anyway in comparison to the Roderic Hamilton TIR, so these two don't worry about it. But in future please have someone peer review them before sending them to me. Hamilton TIR Feedback Needs work or needs to be combined with others. There is not enough in this TIR to justify a key findings TIR. It is just simply a summary of your database results. You could not find a connection the subject or derogatory information and you should have at least one. If you have others like this take a look at them together and see if they can be combined. At the very least one TIR could be written to indicate they were potential witnesses with no discernable connections to the defendant and list the defendant. You are still writing the TIR like you are summarizing you database results. The TIR format is lead sentence (key finding statement) and supporting bullets ( evidence to support your key finding). Stop using sub-bullets unless absolutely necessary. Each evidence bullet requires in-text citations which always include, at minimum the date and source type. If a human source is used then you much include access as well/. Don't but the date researched in the lead sentence, since the lead sentence should mirror your key findings. You can add context, but not the information that goes in the bullet. There is no substitute for that. In your pare ethical citation you need to include the search criteria for the TECS information, per the guidance. TIR Feedback Much of the same formatting feedback from above. EFTA00174298 Much better than Hamilton. There are at least connections in this to the defendant. This one can stand alone with a second bullet on the first key finding. Per the style guide you need at least two bullets to substantiate your key findings, no more than five. How is your second question relevant to the case? Your questions on the Hamilton TIR were much better and can be used on each of these. I know you said you have several of these. Based on the amount of information you've gathered on each and the type of information gathered some of these may need to be combined and some can stand alone. We will have to determine on a case by case basis. Let me know if you have any questions. A/SIA FBI New York I ID-13 Desk: From: Meder, R. (NY) (FBI) Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2022 4:03 PM To: Randle, L. (NY) (FBI) Subject: RE: MI= TIR UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Hi M- I was not aware we were sending TIRs to be peer reviewed? From: Randle, L. (NY) (FBI) < Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2022 3:48 PM To: Meder, R. (NY) (FBI) Subject: RE: M=TIR UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Who peer reviewed it? A/SIA FBI New York I ID-13 Desk: From: Meder, R. (NY) (FBI) Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2022 2:13 PM To: Randle, L. (NY) (FBI) Subject: == TIR UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO EFTA00174299 TRANSITORY RECORD Hi M - Attached is the TIR for--. Thanks, Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Classification: UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO EFTA00174300

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

CLAIM ID: 26H9-2VPP

CLAIM ID: 26H9-2VPP UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-CV-80811-MARRAMOHNSON Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EPSTEIN and Defendants. / PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF SERVING VERIFIED ANSWERS TO SECOND INTERROGATORIES COMES NOW the Plaintiff, , by and through the undersigned counsel, and hereby gives notice that that Verified Answers to Second Interrogatories propounded by the Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, on August 28, 2009, have been furnished to the attorney for the Defendant. I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing has been furnished by e-mail this trday of November, 2009 to alt counsel ob the attached service list. Attorney tor minim 3505-038 Page I of 5 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00005262 EFTA00157825 CLAIM ID: 26H9-2VPP VS. EPSTEIN, et al Case No.: 08-CV-80811-Marra/Johnson Plaintiffs Verified Answers to Second Interrogatories SERVICE LIST Jack A. Goldberger, Esquire Atterbury, Goldb

5p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' yt To: ' .111r)a.r>alSANYS)" )" Cc: ' (CRM)" czi Subject: RE: SDNY case Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 10:46:21 +0000 Dea I heard you defeated the bail proposal. Congrats! My meeting with the Paris Prosecutor's Office was pushed by a day, and is now set for January 7th. Can we pick a time for a call between now and then? Would Tuesday the 5th in the am (NY time) work for everyone? In the meantime, I am referring the French MLAT request to your IC ). I don't know if you have any privilege issues in your case...and I don't see anything in the request that would revealed any privileged info. But I wanted to mention, in case anyone needs to screen it before it comes to you. If not, I can send it to you directly as well. DOJ Attache/Magistrat de liaison anthicain U.S. Embassy, Paris From: Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2020 6:03 PM To: (USANYS) Cc: (CRM) < Subject: RE: SDNY case Hi all, (CRM) Maxwell's attorneys filed the attached supplemental report from their French

12p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Prosecutors allegedly colluded with Jeffrey Epstein’s lawyers to downplay federal charges and secure a lenient plea

The passage alleges that senior U.S. attorneys and a federal prosecutor (Andrew Acosta, Paul Villafafia) worked with Epstein’s legal team to limit federal prosecution, manipulate venue, and keep victi Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Lourie attempted to strike references to a defendant’s prior sexual c U.S. Attorney Paul Villafafia negotiated with Epstein’s lawyers while an FBI investigation was act

1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: "

From: " :1" To:' Subject: accessory Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 05:33:58 +0000 Embedded: possible_guidelines_calculation.msg Just throwing this out there, but accessory after the fact (18 U.S.C. 3) has the following elements: First, that the crime of [specify crime' alleged in the Indictment was committed by 'specify offenderl; Second, that the defendant had knowledge of the commission of that crime and [the offender's' participation in it: Third, that with such knowledge, the defendant in some way assisted 'the offender' with the specific purpose or plan to hinder or prevent [the offender's' apprehension, trial or punishment. The punishment is: an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment [. . .]; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years. One-half the maximum term of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking being, of course, a cap of 2.5 years.

1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 47 Filed 08/19/19 Page 1 of 1

Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 47 Filed 08/19/19 Page 1 of 1 U.S. Department ofJustiee United States Attorney Southern District of New York The Silvio J. Mollo Bullefing One Saint Andrew's Plaza New York. New York 10007 August 19, 2019 VIA ECF The Honorable Richard M. Berman United States District Judge Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, New York 10007 Re: United States v. Jeffrey Epstein, 19 Cr. 490 (RMB) Dear Judge Berman: As the Court is aware, on the morning of August 10, 2019, Jeffrey Epstein died while in custody at the Metropolitan Correctional Center. On August 16, 2019, and after conducting an autopsy, the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner of the City of New York issued a statement identifying the cause of death as hanging, and the manner of death as suicide. In light of the death of the defendant prior to a conviction becoming final, the Government must request the Court approve the attached proposed or

1p
House OversightLegal FilingUnknown

The US Attorney's office filed a response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for reconsideration regardin...

The US Attorney's office filed a response to Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for reconsideration regarding the disclosure of juror names, arguing that the defendant's request for early disclosure is not justified and that the court's current plan for juror name disclosure is sufficient. The government contends that the defendant is seeking extra time to conduct research on prospective jurors without a valid reason. The government's response cites relevant case law and the court's previous orders to support its position.

1p

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.