(USAFLS)" <=1MIIM>
Summary
From: (USAFLS)" <=1MIIM> To: (USAFLS)" Cc: 'ar, 'at" . (USAFLS)" Subject: Conference Call with Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:31:04 +0000 Importance: Normal Willy and Ben, Marie and I just finished a conference call with Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell, attorneys for the victims. The objective of the victims is to have the Non-Prosecution Agreement set aside, and to have the federal government prosecute Jeffrey Epstein for the sexual exploitation of minors. Cassell agreed that the district court would have no authority to compel the Department of Justice to prosecute Epstein. Insofar as the victims' response to the order to show cause, which is due today, the victims would not agree to moving for an enlargement of time, because they feared it would make them look bad, in seeking further delay. Cassell said it would be a gesture of good faith for the government to agree not to file a motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution. When I said we wou
Persons Referenced (6)
“... During this extension period, Edwards and Cassell would want to meet with the U.S. Attorney and Executive Staff regarding resolution of the case, to include a prosecution of Epstein. The issue is ...”
Jeffrey Epstein“...-Prosecution Agreement set aside, and to have the federal government prosecute Jeffrey Epstein for the sexual exploitation of minors. Cassell agreed that the district court would have no authority ...”
Paul CassellExecutive Staff“...sion period, Edwards and Cassell would want to meet with the U.S. Attorney and Executive Staff regarding resolution of the case, to include a prosecution of Epstein. The issue is how important it i...”
Tags
Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureRelated Documents (6)
From: "
From: " (USAFLS)" </O=USA/OU=FLS/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN= To: "0 (USAFLS)" < Cc: : T1SAFLS)" < (USAFLS)" < Subject: RE: Conference Call with Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:38:19 +0000 Importance: Normal (USAFLS)" Sounds good. 11SSISItIllt ey 500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 From: (USAFLS) Sent Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:37 PM To: InlSAFLS); Cc: 1.....USAFLS); ii(USAFLS) Subject: Re: Conference Call with Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards Great. I'll come down at 1:30. From: (USAFLS) Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:35 PM To: (USAF SAFLS) Cc: =MOM (USAFLS); (USAFLS) SubjiaTITTC7arence Call with Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards will be here at 1:30pm. Thanks. From: lirt (USAF' S) Sent Wall aOrEEE) 27, 2010 12:35 PM To: (USAFLS); (USAFLS) Cc: (USAFLS); USAFLS) Sub -: on erence Call with Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards Thanks. MI is out of the District but I'm around. Can we talk at 1:30 OM we can call
To: Paul Cassell <[email protected]>, "
From: To: Paul Cassell <[email protected]>, " Cc: Subject: RE: Voluntary Production of Materials - three ideas Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 00:47:46 +0000 Importance: Normal Dear Paul and Brad: Thank you for your email. Here is where we are on your three requests. Your first request asks for the emails from Epstein's lawyers to attorneys within the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding the non-prosecution agreement. Our understanding regarding the status of the current litigation is that Judge Marra currently has motions pending before him addressing: (1) whether you can use the emails that you have already received from other civil cases in this litigation and (2) whether any work product privilege or other privilege applies to the additional email communications that you seek. Given the status of those motions, it would be imprudent and inappropriate to voluntarily produce the materials to you prior to receiving the Court's ruling on those pending issues. We will, however, un
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
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
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
Subject: Re: Government's Position on Page Limits
From: To: Cc: Subject: Re: Government's Position on Page Limits Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 01:46:34 +0000 Importance: Normal Paul, You are welcome. The Southern District of Florida Local Rules do not distinguish between civil and criminal proceedings when it comes to the page length of a memorandum of law. S.D.Fla.L.R. 7.1(c)(2) limits a legal memorandum to twenty pages. The government has no objection to petitioners seeking leave to file a legal memorandum exceeding the page limitation by approximately fifteen pages. From: Paul Cassell Sent: Thursda March 17, 2011 08:40 PM To: Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: Government's Position on Page Limits Dear 1. Thank you for the information sent today. 2. What is the Government's position on the page limits applicable to our "summary judgment" pleading — do you believe we are under the civil rules? Or under the criminal rules? Do you believe that we need to file a separate motion for a roughly 35 page pleading with roughly 19 pa
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.