Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00207958DOJ Data Set 9Other

Subject: Re: Government's Position on Several Pending Issues? Still Waiting for Answer

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00207958
Pages
2
Persons
4
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

From Tc Subject: Re: Government's Position on Several Pending Issues? Still Waiting for Answer Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:53:52 +0000 Importance: Normal Thx From: Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 07:38 PM To: Cc: Subject: FW: Government's Position on Several Pending Issues? Still Waiting for Answer Here is Prof. Cassell's response to Willy's letter, for your records. From: Paul Cassell Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 7:21 PM To: Cc: Subject: RE: Government's Position on Several Pending Issues? Still Waiting for Answer Dear Brad and I have received Mr. Ferrer's letter of today. We are deeply disappointed. We will file our court pleadings on Friday. Mr. Ferrer's letter still leaves unanswered a number of questions, which I am writing to raise with you -- again. 1. You still have not provided, as you promised you would, the name of the person coordinating the OPR investigation. As a result we have not been able to obtain any information about the status of the investiga

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 Tc Subject: Re: Government's Position on Several Pending Issues? Still Waiting for Answer Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:53:52 +0000 Importance: Normal Thx From: Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 07:38 PM To: Cc: Subject: FW: Government's Position on Several Pending Issues? Still Waiting for Answer Here is Prof. Cassell's response to Willy's letter, for your records. From: Paul Cassell Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 7:21 PM To: Cc: Subject: RE: Government's Position on Several Pending Issues? Still Waiting for Answer Dear Brad and I have received Mr. Ferrer's letter of today. We are deeply disappointed. We will file our court pleadings on Friday. Mr. Ferrer's letter still leaves unanswered a number of questions, which I am writing to raise with you -- again. 1. You still have not provided, as you promised you would, the name of the person coordinating the OPR investigation. As a result we have not been able to obtain any information about the status of the investigation. Just to be clear, we intend to include in our filing information that OPR has begun an investigation and to include the information that we currently have about Bruce Reinhart — we assume that making that information public will not compromise OPR's work. 2. We will be making initial disclosures to you under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure shortly. We have not heard back from you on whether you will be making parallel disclosures. Accordingly, we understand your position to be that you are not obligated to provide to us any documents under Rule 26. 3. We understand your position to be that, despite the "best efforts" clause in the CVRA and your obligation to treat victims with fairness, you can withhold evidence from the victims that will help them prove CVRA violations. For example, we understand you to take the position that you can withhold the other half of the U.S. Attorney's correspondence, correspondence ment and Ken Starr and Lillian Sanchez on behalf of Epstein, and information about role in the Epstein case. In short, we understand you to be asserting a blanket position a you can withhold information that will EFTA00207958 help prove the victims' CVRA case. If this is incorrect, please advise us promptly. If we have misunderstood you and you are willing to provide us relevant information, we will promptly provide you with a list of such information. If we have understood you correctly, we will be filing a motion with the Court shortly to block the Justice Department from suppressing such highly relevant information. 4. You still have not given us your position on the victims' motion to file an unsealed, unredacted pleading reciting the U.S. Attorney's correspondence. What is your position on that motion: We have been asking for your position on this motion for some time now. If we have not heard back from you by c.o.b. Wednesday, March 16, 2011, we will include in our pleadings the following statement: "The Justice Department attorneys handling this case have been contacted several times for their position on this issue but have refused to respond to give their position." Thanks you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely, Paul Cassell, Co-Counsel for Jane Doe Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 332 South 1400 East, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0730 http://www.law.utah.edu/profiles/default.asp?Personl D=57&name=Ca sse II 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. EFTA00207959

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
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

NY Post seeks to unseal sealed appellate briefs in Jeffrey Epstein appeal, exposing DA and prosecutor conduct

The filing reveals a concrete dispute over sealed court documents that could shed light on why the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and Florida prosecutors allegedly gave Jeffrey Epstein preferent NY Post filed a motion (Dec 21, 2018) to unseal appellate briefs in Epstein’s SORA appeal, requestin Manhattan DA’s office (Danny Frost, Karen Friedman‑Agnifilo) initially opposed unsealing, citing C

55p
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

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

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Jeffrey Epstein attorney Roy Black denies allegations in letter by ex-U.S. Attorney Alexa... Page I of 3

Jeffrey Epstein attorney Roy Black denies allegations in letter by ex-U.S. Attorney Alexa... Page I of 3 PalmBeachDailyNpyy5,,cpsn Print this page Close Jeffrey Epstein attorney Roy Black denies allegations in letter by ex-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta By MICHELE DARGAN DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER Updated: 9:21 a.m. Wednesday, March 30. 2011 Posted: 7:24 p.m. Tuesday. March 29. 2011 Attorney Roy Black is disputing claims that he, and other attorneys representing Jeffrey Epstein, pried into federal prosecutors' personal lives in attempting to disqualify them from investigating the billionaire sex offender. Black also denies Epstein's attorneys "negotiated in bad faith," while attempting to reach an agreement with federal prosecutors. In a written response Tuesday to the Palm Beach Daily News, Black disputes claims made against Epstein's defense team by former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta. Those and other allegations by Acosta were contained in a three-page letter printed

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Jeffrey Epstein attorney Roy Black denies allegations in letter by ex-U.S. Attorney Alexa... Page I of 3

Jeffrey Epstein attorney Roy Black denies allegations in letter by ex-U.S. Attorney Alexa... Page I of 3 PalmBeachDailyNpyy5,,cpsn Print this page Close Jeffrey Epstein attorney Roy Black denies allegations in letter by ex-U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta By MICHELE DARGAN DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER Updated: 9:21 a.m. Wednesday, March 30. 2011 Posted: 7:24 p.m. Tuesday. March 29. 2011 Attorney Roy Black is disputing claims that he, and other attorneys representing Jeffrey Epstein, pried into federal prosecutors' personal lives in attempting to disqualify them from investigating the billionaire sex offender. Black also denies Epstein's attorneys "negotiated in bad faith," while attempting to reach an agreement with federal prosecutors. In a written response Tuesday to the Palm Beach Daily News, Black disputes claims made against Epstein's defense team by former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta. Those and other allegations by Acosta were contained in a three-page letter printed

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.