Epstein Secrets

a better job communicating with the public." NYTimes: Camden Could Serve Example To Other Police Departments. The New York Times (7/12, Goldstein, Armstrong, 18.61M) reports that "as officials across the United States face demands to transform policing, many have turned to" Camden, New Jersey, which "di

d Black, Bernard Kerik, Rod Blagojevich, Michael Milken, Paul Pogue, David Safavian, Eddie DeBartolo Jr.

gone to people with either personal or political ties to Trump (or both): Joe Arpaio, Dinesh D'Souza, Conrad Black, Bernard Kerik, Rod Blagojevich, Michael Milken, Paul Pogue, David Safavian, Eddie DeBartolo Jr. and now Stone. It's hardly unheard-of for a president to pardon allies - see Marc Rich et al. - but

97 U.S. 358, 364 (1970) (holding that proof beyond a reasonable doubt is constitutionally required under the Due Process Clause). ° United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 456-71 (1996) (examining selective prosecution claim based on racial bias); see also Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 813 (1996)

describing the legislative history and Justice Department lobbying related to federal drug statutes, notably 27 U.S.C. § 841 (2012)). 218 See, e.g., Milliken v. Stone, 7 F.2d 397, 399 (S.D.N.Y. 1925), aff'd 16 F.2d 98] (2d Cir. 1927) ("The remedy for [dereliction of the prosecutor's duty] is with the execu

laza New York, New York 10007 August 6, 2019 VIA EMAIL Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. Martin G. Weinber P.C. Boston, MA 02116 Reid Weingarten, Esq. Michael Miller, Esq. Ste toe & Johnson LLP New York, NY 10036 Re: United States v. Jeffrey Epstein, 19 Cr. 490 (RMB) Dear Mr. Weinberg: The Government writes

lves, but rather an independent assertion that charges were brought for reasons that were improper or constitutionally invalid. See United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 463 (1996). Indeed, the defendant will be unable to make any kind of showing of the conspiracy theory that there was activity incons

ding New York, New York 10007 August 8, 2019 VIA EMAIL Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. Martin G. Weinber P.C. Boston, MA 02116 Reid Weingarten, Esq. Michael Miller, Esq. Ste toe & Johnson LLP New York, NY 10036 Re: United States v. Jeffrey Epstein, 19 Cr. 490 (RMB) Dear Mr. Weinberg: The Government writes

de by an attorney for the government or other government agent in connection with investigating or prosecuting the case); see also United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. at 463 (1996) ("[U]nder Rule 16(a)(2), [a defendant] may not examine Government work product in connection with his case."). Fourth Reque