Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00880843DOJ Data Set 9Other

From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]>

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
efta-efta00880843
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> To: Martin Weinberg Subject: Re: ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 22:28:31 +0000 its not your email thats at issue it is mine to you. saying we should tread carefully. how can i have a willful breach, if they ddin't plead correctly, did it in fact challenge liability, or merely the wording of the statute, how else should we have ascertaineed whether a conviction is needed as opposed to a broad allegation of a violation without any details.. doesMhink i have to admit that i violated an enumerated statute, without knowing which one or when , or to whom/ On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Martin Weinberg < > wrote: not unless its decided you will make some concessions on fee issues or settlement issues lets discuss monday as well as what response you take regarding the filing that triggered friday's "breach" - the fact that I redflagged it early on Wed AM for Jay cuts two ways --- Original Message -- From: Jeffrey Epstein To: Martin Weinberg Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 5:43 PM Subject: Re: ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE do you think i should go forward with the jpsoehburg face to face? On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Martin Weinberg < - rote You and I redflagged the issue for Jay. But lets get beyond yesterday's events. Set up procedure so Roy, Alan, I are empowered to veto civil pleading. -- Original Message ---- From: Jeffrey Epstein To: Martin Weinberg • Alan M. Dershowitz Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 5:12 PM LRoy Sloman will just say we have a written agreement and refer to 4:10 PM (37 minutes BLACK that. The lawye... ago) EItoy BLACKLoading...4:10 PM (36 minutes ago) Roy BLACK show details 4:10 PM (37 minutes ago) Reply g5bIlow up message to me Sloman will just say we have a written agreement and refer to that. The lawyers are at fault here. How could they possibly think this was not a violation? One of the purposes was to avoid a criminal trial and conviction. We are theproverbial kid who kills his parents and asks for mercy because he is an orphan. Let's not fool ourselves here. EFTA00880843

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Related Documents (6)

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, Plaintiffs I UNITED STATES, Defendants JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO THE GOVERNMENT REGARDING INFORMATION RELEVANT TO THEIR PENDING ACTION CONCERN THE CRIME VICTIMS RIGHTS ACT COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 ("the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, and request the defendant United States (hereinafter "the Government") to produce the original or best copy of the items listed herein below for inspection and/or copying, pursuant to the Court's Order (DE #99) directing discovery in this case. BACKGROUND As the Government will recall, the victims have asked the Government to stipulate to undisputed facts in this case. The Government has declined. Accordingly, the victims filed their Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act and Request for a Hearing on Appropriate Remedies (DE 48

13p
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

From: "Martin Weinberg" <

2p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case: 13-12923

28p
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, Plaintiffs I UNITED STATES, Defendants JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO THE GOVERNMENT REGARDING INFORMATION RELEVANT TO THEIR PENDING ACTION CONCERN THE CRIME VICTIMS RIGHTS ACT COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 ("the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, and request the defendant United States (hereinafter "the Government") to produce the original or best copy of the items listed herein below for inspection and/or copying, pursuant to the Court's Order (DE #99) directing discovery in this case. BACKGROUND As the Government will recall, the victims have asked the Government to stipulate to undisputed facts in this case. The Government has declined. Accordingly, the victims filed their Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act and Request for a Hearing on Appropriate Remedies (DE 48

13p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

No. 13-12923

58p

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.