Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards
Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 21:49:14 +0000 Importance: Normal I am going home to let the pooches out and to finish 2 2255's. If you need me, call my cell. I will let you know when I hear from Brad. Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards Not too quickly. Nothing up there happens quickly. Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards How quickly would I have a stroke if 1 worked up there ? Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards DC = action EFTA00211350 Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 5:42 PM Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards I was hoping that the suggestion might scare them into action! u ject: RE: Telephone conf with ra Edwards I guess a part of me must just have found the idea of a judge ordering someone at ODAG to do something a little bit appealing. Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards I w a s joking. my friend Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards Nope. As it is, the meeting i
Summary
Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 21:49:14 +0000 Importance: Normal I am going home to let the pooches out and to finish 2 2255's. If you need me, call my cell. I will let you know when I hear from Brad. Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards Not too quickly. Nothing up there happens quickly. Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards How quickly would I have a stroke if 1 worked up there ? Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards DC = action EFTA00211350 Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 5:42 PM Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards I was hoping that the suggestion might scare them into action! u ject: RE: Telephone conf with ra Edwards I guess a part of me must just have found the idea of a judge ordering someone at ODAG to do something a little bit appealing. Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards I w a s joking. my friend Subject: RE: Telephone conf with Brad Edwards Nope. As it is, the meeting i
Persons Referenced (1)
Tags
Ask AI About This Document
Extracted Text (OCR)
Related Documents (6)
Filing # 35429605 E-Filed 12/11/2015 10:08:04 AM
Case 09-34791-RBR
Alleged Non‑Prosecution Agreement (NPA) Shielded Jeffrey Epstein from a 53‑count indictment and kept victims uninformed
Alleged Non‑Prosecution Agreement (NPA) Shielded Jeffrey Epstein from a 53‑count indictment and kept victims uninformed The passage cites a specific non‑prosecution agreement that allegedly prevented a 53‑count federal indictment of Jeffrey Epstein and describes victim‑exclusion tactics. It names dates, a federal prosecutor’s draft indictment, and references to legal filings, offering concrete leads for further FOIA or court‑record requests. While the claim is not novel—Epstein’s NPA has been reported—it provides actionable details (Feb 10 2016 filing, Sept 2007 signing, June 30 2008 termination) that could be pursued to verify the agreement’s terms, the officials who negotiated it, and any potential misconduct by DOJ or the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Key insights: A 53‑count indictment prepared by federal prosecutors was never filed due to an NPA.; Victims were allegedly not consulted about the NPA, violating victim‑rights statutes.; The NPA was signed in September 2007 and remained in effect until June 30, 2008.
Dershowitz seeks to seal Giuffre affidavit in Edwards‑Cassell defamation case, claims media attacks are fabricated
Dershowitz seeks to seal Giuffre affidavit in Edwards‑Cassell defamation case, claims media attacks are fabricated The passage hints at a possible concealment of evidence in a high‑profile defamation dispute involving Alan Dershowitz, a prominent attorney, and references the infamous Giuffre allegations. While it names well‑known legal figures, it provides no concrete financial transactions, dates, or new factual revelations beyond already public claims, limiting its investigative utility. However, the suggestion that a court record may be sealed to hide potentially damaging testimony offers a moderate lead for further document‑review and freedom‑of‑information requests. Key insights: Dershowitz requests the court to declare portions of Ms. Giuffre’s affidavit confidential.; He publicly denies the allegations on BBC Radio 4, framing them as a coordinated false‑story campaign.; Dershowitz threatens perjury prosecution against accusers and seeks disbarment of opposing counsel.
The Palm Beach Post
EFTA01838551
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.