Epstein Secrets

ion ofNat’lSec. Archive, 104 F. Supp. 3d 625 (S.D.N.Y. 2015) (same); In re Petition of Kutler, 800 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 2011) (release of President Nixon’s grand jury deposition testimony in connection with third Watergate grand jury); In re Unseal Dockets Related to the Indep. Counsel’s 1998 Investiga

99:25- 300:8). Detective Recarey shared the same view that “it wasn’t any.justice served.” Appendix at 2 (Recarey Depo. 496:1-2). 26. Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Andrew Lourie, in a transmittal letter with the prosecution memo of Assistant U.S'. Attorney Ann Marie Villafana, told

nt of Justice Policy with respect to the information it may subpoena and how that information may be used. • The letter overstates the flaws of the Nixon standard, since the Government's robust discovery obligations adequately enable a defendant to understand the strengths and weaknesses of a case aga

Speaker During the second half of the meeting, we will be joined by Ken Blanco. Ken served for many years as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division, after service as an AUSA in the Southern District of Florida. After a stint as Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, Ken joi

e proposal and accompanying note, I am concerned that the limits on subpoenas found in the United States Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Nixon 734 might be vitiated by a broad rule. To ensure courts consistently apply Nixon's substantive and procedural standards to victim-related subpoenas,

rime victims rights representative. See CVRA Subcommittee Memo, supra note 66, at 1 (noting that Deborah Rhodes, Counselor to the Asst. Atty. Gen. of the Criminal Division, served on the subcommittee drafting this language). 416 At another point in its memorandum, the CVRA Subcommittee refers to /8 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(6),