Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00205035DOJ Data Set 9Other

Subject: FW: OPR inquiry - request for information

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00205035
Pages
4
Persons
5
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

From To Subject: FW: OPR inquiry - request for information Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 16:31:22 +0000 Importance: Normal Attachments: motion-intervene.pdf; sanctions-motion-attached.pdf This is Cassell's response to Bruce Reinhart's motion to intervene. From: Paul rakeoll [- Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 12:23 PM To: Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: OPR inquiry - request for information Dear As you will have seen, Bruce Reinhard has filed a motion to intervene in our Crime Victims' Rights Act case. (Since has not been served, I attach a copy of the pleading to this e-mail). As you will see, Reinhard claims that we have no factual basis for making an assertion that (for example) Reinhard improperly represented in violation of Justice Department regulations. In view of this motion, we are writing to inquire into the current status of the Justice Department's inquiry into Reinhard's conduct. We also believe that the Justice Department has access to information that will support

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: FW: OPR inquiry - request for information Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 16:31:22 +0000 Importance: Normal Attachments: motion-intervene.pdf; sanctions-motion-attached.pdf This is Cassell's response to Bruce Reinhart's motion to intervene. From: Paul rakeoll [- Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 12:23 PM To: Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: OPR inquiry - request for information Dear As you will have seen, Bruce Reinhard has filed a motion to intervene in our Crime Victims' Rights Act case. (Since has not been served, I attach a copy of the pleading to this e-mail). As you will see, Reinhard claims that we have no factual basis for making an assertion that (for example) Reinhard improperly represented in violation of Justice Department regulations. In view of this motion, we are writing to inquire into the current status of the Justice Department's inquiry into Reinhard's conduct. We also believe that the Justice Department has access to information that will support the allegations in our summary judgment motion. We further believe that the Justice Department has access to information that will help us respond to Reinhard's claim that he was not privy to any non-public information about the Epstein case. We are therefore respectfully requesting that the Justice Department provide this information to us by Tuesday, May 10, 2011, so that we can use this information in responding to Reinhard's motion to intervene. Alternatively, if releasing the information at this time will be harmful to the Justice Department's on-going inquiry into Reinhard's conduct, we request that the Justice Department inform Judge Marra that the Reinhard situation is currently the subject of a Justice Department inquiry and that further release of information would be harmful at this time. We request an opportunity to discuss this matter with you at your earliest convenience. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely, Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell Co-Counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law S Quinnev CnHeap of Law at the University of Utah EFTA00205035 CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you. From Sent: n y, n , : To: Paul Cassell Subject: RE: OPR complaint Thanks, Paul. I will pass this on to the Assistant conducting the review. From: Paul Cassell [mailto:cassellp@law.utah.edu] Se 4:57 PM To: Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: OPR complaint Hi Thanks for getting back to me. I was confused about one point — my letter to U.S. Attorney Ferrer requesting further investigation of the Epstein matter didn't appear to me to raise any issues that even arguably could have been raised in litigation. So I was a bit confused by the reference to that complication in your e-mail — I wasn't sure what you were suggesting might have been the subject of earlier litigation. Perhaps you were referring to Crime Victims Rights Act issues. As you know, we have raised claims in on-going litigation that the government attorneys violated the Crime Victims Rights Act -- the government attorneys have now responded by arguing that these issues are not properly subject to litigation and the issue is under review by Judge Marra. But we were asking OPR for a general review of the issue of whether improper influences were brought to bear or improper actions taken that led to Epstein receiving a generous "non-prosecution" offer from the U.S. Attorney's Office — a separate subject. Thanks for keeping us posted. Paul Cassell Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law c I fliiinnow fnllaao of I MA/ at tha I Inivarcitu of CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you. From Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 2:24 PM To: Paul Cassell Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: OPR complaint EFTA00205036 Paul, your complaint is under review. Please note that it is unusual for OPR to initiate an investigation of matters that have been or could be raised in litigation. If we determine based on the record in the pending matter that this is the case, we most likely will decline to go forward. Of course, if a court makes a finding criticizing the government or finding misconduct, the complaint can be renewed, We will let you know the results of our review. From: Paul Cassell [mailt Se :10 PM To Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: OPR complaint Hi I'm just writing to see what the status is regarding the OPR inquiry that has been initiated into the Epstein matter. Brad Edwards and I would like to update our clients. Also, I am wondering if we can be helpful in providing any information to you in the inquiry. We know a lot about the Epstein matters, and would be happy to pass that along to you. Thanks in advance for any further information you can provide. Paul Cassell , Co-Counsel for Jane Doe Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you. From: Sent: .t 1.111.1.1 To: Paul Cassell Subject: RE: OPR complaint Thanks, Paul. OPR takes no position regarding any party's representations in litigation. From: Paul Cassel Se 011 12:11 PM To: Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: OPR complaint EFTA00205037 Thanks for the information. Tomorrow (3/18) we will be filing a pleading in which we mention AUSJ apparently improper representation of Epstein-related witnesses. I assume that doing so publicly will not compromise your inquiry. We look forward to hearing from you as a soon as possible about the results of your inquiry. Thanks for your help. Paul Cassell Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you. From: Sent: ur ay, arc To: Paul Cassell Subject: OPR complaint Mr. Cassell, I received your voice mail and thought that I should respond by email to be sure you get a timely answer — with the time difference it can be hard to get in touch. I understand from AUSAMthat he confirmed to you that he sent your complaint and request for an investigation to OPR. We will therefore consider you a complainant in the matter. Your complaint is being handled within the normal process here at OPR. It has been opened as an inquiry and assigned for review. It is not an investigation. We will contact you if we need further information and/or to inform you of the results of our review. Acting Associate Counsel Office of Professional Responsibility U.S. Department of Justice EFTA00205038

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: Re: Motion to Compel and S.J. Briefing Schedule

From: To: Cc: Subject: Re: Motion to Compel and S.J. Briefing Schedule Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 20:25:09 +0000 Importance: Normal 6:00pm is fine for me. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 8, 2017, at 15:22, Either is fine. I will be here late. From: Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 3:16 PM To: Subje : : o ion o ompe an S.J. rie ingc e ue wrote: I have a conference call at 5pm. It should be over by 6pm, if not earlier. Can we talk at 6pm or I can email you if my conference call ends earlier? From: Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 2:38 PM To: Subject: RE: Motion to Compel and S.i. Briefing Schedule You can get me on the line once alls in. I will be at my desk -= From Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 2:11 PM To: Cc: Subject: Re: Motion to Compel and S.J. Briefing Schedule I am out of class at 5:15 pm. What number shall I call? EFTA00211070 Sent from my iPhone On Mar 8, 2017, at 11:56, Can we talk later this afternoon? Begin forwarded message: From: Paul Cassell < Da

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: Paul Cassell

From: Paul Cassell To: Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: ere o "e tan on t e ropose tatement of Facts? Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 21:24:26 +0000 Importance: Normal Hi Brad and I both agree that we need to get the facts resolved first, then discuss where we go from there. At the same time, we want to get this moving along. Can we set a specific time line for getting the facts resolved — is there a time that works for you and in the near future to have a conference call? Then is there a specific time shortly after Thanksgiving that would workyou're your U.S. Attorney? Paul Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law http://www.law.utah.edu/profiles/default.asp?PersonID=S7&name=Cassell Paul CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you may not use

4p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' (USAFLS)" To: >, ' (USAFLS)" Subject: RE: Motion to Compel and S.J. Briefing Schedule Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 19:38:15 +0000 Importance: Normal Hi I.— You can get me on the line once calls in. I will be at my desk — 41047 A. Vi&faller Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of Florida From: M, (USAFLS) Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 2:11 PM To:a (USAFLS) < Cc:a MI I. (USAFLS) Subject: Re: Motion to Compel and Si. Briefing Schedule I am out of class at 5:15 pm. What number shall I call? Sent from my iPhone c On Mar 8, 2017, at 11:56, a, (USAFLS) > wrote: Can we talk later this afternoon? Begin forwarded message: From: Paul Cassell <a> Date: March 8, 2017 at 8:51:03 AM EST To: "Brad Edwards (USAFLS)" Cc: " I. (USAFLS)" '`= > (USAFLS)" Subject: RE: Motion to Compel and S.J. Briefing Schedule Dear I'm writing to express some concerns about the Government's recent response to our most recent discovery requests and to request a stipulated bri

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-CI V-Marra/Matthewman JANE DOE # I and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS' FIRST REOUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO THE GOVERNMENT The United States (hereinafter the "government") hereby responds to 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 (hereinafter the "Request for Admissions"), and states as follows:' I. The government admits that the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO") conducted an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") and developed evidence and information in contemplation of a potential federal prosecution against Epstein for many federal sex offenses. Except as otherwise admitted above, the government denies Request No. I. The government's res

65p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subjec

Fr • < > Subjec :Deliberative t Process ec aratton rom am Justice - equest or wo ee xtension Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 17:59:47 +0000 Importance: Normal We have no objection, provided we get the following accommodation, which you already anticipated. We would request that your motion for extension of time give us an extension on our reply document, such that our reply would be due 10 days after the main Justice Department declaration that will be coming in two weeks. If you would include such language as well in any proposed order, saving us (and the court) drafting time, that would be very much appreciated. Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G Cassell CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message along with any/all attachments is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message

2p
Court UnsealedDepositionJul 31, 2020

Virginia Giuffre Deposition May 2016

Case Document 1090-32 Filed 07/30/20 Page 1 of 89 EXHIBIT Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1090-32 Filed 07/30/20 Page 2 of 89 GIUFFRE VS. MAXWELL Deposition VIRGINIA GIUFFRE 05/03/2016 _______________________________________________________________________ Agren Blando Court Reporting & Video, Inc. 216 16th Street, Suite 600 Denver Colorado, 80202 303-296-0017 Agren Blando Court Reporting & Video, Inc. Page 3 of 89 Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1090-32 Filed 07/30/20 Page 1 IN THE UNI

89p

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.