Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00207944DOJ Data Set 9Other

From: Paul Cassell

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00207944
Pages
2
Persons
6
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

From: Paul Cassell To: "a i FIS i i > ., (USAFLS)" (USAFL rS)" UM> Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: Redacted Pleading Rather than Sealing the Entire Pleading Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 17:48:54 +0000 Importance: Normal Dear We haven't heard back from you on the issue regarding sealing of the Government's pleading in the Epstein case. (See email below sent earlier this week.) I was hoping that you (or could get back to Brad and me quickly on this issue. As you know, we have a series of pleadings that we need to file on Monday. We are trying to understand the Government's position on sealing these pleadings. As you also know, we think there is absolutely no basis for sealing the majority of the Government's pleadings. We hope you agree so that we can move forward consensually, at least on this issue. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Paul Cassell Co-Counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe ti2 Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law rI vv

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: Paul Cassell To: "a i FIS i i > ., (USAFLS)" (USAFL rS)" UM> Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: Redacted Pleading Rather than Sealing the Entire Pleading Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 17:48:54 +0000 Importance: Normal Dear We haven't heard back from you on the issue regarding sealing of the Government's pleading in the Epstein case. (See email below sent earlier this week.) I was hoping that you (or could get back to Brad and me quickly on this issue. As you know, we have a series of pleadings that we need to file on Monday. We are trying to understand the Government's position on sealing these pleadings. As you also know, we think there is absolutely no basis for sealing the majority of the Government's pleadings. We hope you agree so that we can move forward consensually, at least on this issue. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Paul Cassell Co-Counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe ti2 Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law rI vvAv.law.utah.edu/proffies/default.asp?PersonID=57&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, 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: Paul Csicsi.11 Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 2:29 PM To: . (USAFLSY; (USAFLSY; (USAFLSY Cc: 'Brad Edwards' Subject: RE: Redacted Pleading Rather than Sealing the Entire Pleading Dear I am writing as co-counsel in the Jane Doe case. I understand that you are supervising the case for U.S. Attorney's Office there. I am writing to request that the Government file new, redacted copies of its currently pending motion to dismiss and motion for stay. As you may know, the Government has filed these two motions entirely under seal. Yet the vast bulk of both motions do not deal with any material that needs to be under seal. As you may know, Judge Marra has previously unsealed other pleadings in this case, recognizing the considerable public interest in the EFTA00207944 issues being discussed. As you also know, Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 have tried to work cooperatively with the Government wherever possible. For example, we earlier stipulated to proposed redactions of material proposed by to avoid disclosing information that she viewed as confidential. In light of all this, the victims are writing to inquire whether the Government would file a motion to place redacted copies of its two motions in the public court file in the case. Attached are hvo redacted pleadings that we believe remove all information that is properly subject to sealing to protect confidential grand jury material - but no more. Please let me know whether the Government is willing to move forward on that basis. Sincerely, Paul Cassell Co-Counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law S.J. 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. EFTA00207945

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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

64p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

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 I. 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

64p
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
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

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

87p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: Re: SDNY News Clips Wednesday, July 31, 2019

From: To: Subject: Re: SDNY News Clips Wednesday, July 31, 2019 Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 23:27:22 +0000 Ha, really? In that case pretty sure I've seen the filing but will take a look. Thanks Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2019, at 7:24 PM, ) < > wrote: That article is a reference to a government filing from over a month ago (Spencer Kuvin seems especially interested in being quotes in belated but inflammatory fashion on these issues) — but in any event, the NDGA filing from then is attached. From: Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 17:14 To: Subject: FW: SDNY News Clips Wednesday, July 31, 2019 It looks like NDGa just filed something in the CVRA litigation — do you have a copy by any chance? From: Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 5:12 PM Cc: Subject: SDNY News Clips Wednesday, July 31, 2019 SDNY News Clips Wednesday, July 31, 2019 Contents Public Corruption. 2 Epstein. 2 Collins. 18 Securities and Commodities Fraud. 20 Stewart 20 Thompson. 22 Pinto-Thomaz. 24 Narco

25p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. UNITED STATES' OPPOSITION TO JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR FINDING OF VIOLATIONS OF THE CRIME VICTIM RIGHTS ACT AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING ON APPROPRIATE REMEDIES Respondent, United States of America, by and through its undersigned counsel, files its Opposition to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims Rights Act and Request for a Hearing on Appropriate Remedies, and states: I. INTRODUCTION The issue before this Court is whether the petitioners, Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2, had any rights under 18 U.S.C. § 377I(a), in the absence of a criminal charge being filed in the Southern District of Florida, charging someone with the commission of a federal crime in which petitioners were victims. Resolution of this issue is a matter of statutory interpretatio

33p

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.