Epstein Secrets

iller v. City of New York, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4285 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2007) 8 Seife v. Dep't of State, 366 F. Supp. 3d 592 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) 8 Shapiro v. Dep't ofJustice, 249 F. Supp. 3d 502 (D.D.C. 2017) 10 United States v. Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182959 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 4, 5 United Sta

ist. LEXIS 134482 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 2020) 2 Grand Central P 'ship, Inc. v. Cuomo, 166 F.3d 473 (2d Cir. 1999). 8 Human Rights Watch v. DOJ Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123592 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 2 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93 (D.D.C. 2019) 9 N.

u of Prisons, amongst others. HOFFENBERG did not comment on his basis of knowledge, or when he became aware of information pertaining to Epstein or Shapiro. At this time the agents ended the interview. EFTA00108867

he interviewing agents to a March 2003 Vanity Fair article and a website, Tower Investors.com. He advised that he had pending civil matters against the Bureau of Prisons, amongst others. HOFFENBERG did not comment on his basis of knowledge, or when he became aware of information pertaining to Epstein or Shapiro. At

for a couple years.- Lundborg "said Warner disliked authority, loved smoking weed and claimed he'd just gotten out of the Navy." ABC News (12/28, Shapiro, 2.44M) reports, 'Warners neighbor, Rick Laude told ABC News, 'Nothing about this guy raised any red flags that he would do something like this.'"

imo Giannulli, is serving his five-month sentence at a prison in Lompoc near Santa Barbara, California: He "is scheduled to be released on April 17, the Bureau of Prisons says. Prosecutors said Giannulli deserved a tougher sentence because he was 'the more active participant in the scheme." A brief CBS Evening News (

u of Prisons, amongst others. HOFFENBERG did not comment on his basis of knowledge, or when he became aware of information pertaining to Epstein or Shapiro. At this time the agents ended the interview. .• (Overall Document Classification Required) EFTA00270334

e interviewing agents to a March 2003 Vanity Fair article and a website, Tower Investors.com. He advised that he had pending civil matters against the Bureau of Prisons, amongst others. HOFFENBERG did not comment on his basis of knowledge, or when he became aware of information pertaining to Epstein or Shapiro. At

u of Prisons, amongst others. HOFFENBERG did not comment on his basis of knowledge, or when he became aware of information pertaining to Epstein or Shapiro. At this time the agents ended the interview. • • (Overall Document Classification Required) SD NY_GM_02 753265 EFTA_002405B EFTA01326141

e interviewing agents to a March 2003 Vanity Fair article and a website, Tower Investors.com. He advised that he had pending civil matters against the Bureau of Prisons, amongst others. HOFFENBERG did not comment on his basis of knowledge, or when he became aware of information pertaining to Epstein or Shapiro. At

iller v. City of New York, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4285 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2007) 8 Seife v. Dep't of State, 366 F. Supp. 3d 592 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) 8 Shapiro v. Dep't ofJustice, 249 F. Supp. 3d 502 (D.D.C. 2017) 10 United States v. Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182959 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 4, 5 United Sta

ist. LEXIS 134482 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 2020) 2 Grand Central P 'ship, Inc. v. Cuomo, 166 F.3d 473 (2d Cir. 1999). 8 Human Rights Watch v. DOJ Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123592 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 2 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93 (D.D.C. 2019) 9 N.

iller v. City of New York, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4285 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2007) 8 Seife v. Dep't of State, 366 F. Supp. 3d 592 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) 8 Shapiro v. Dep't ofJustice, 249 F. Supp. 3d 502 (D.D.C. 2017) 10 United States v. Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182959 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 4, 5 United Sta

ist. LEXIS 134482 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 2020) 2 Grand Central P 'ship, Inc. v. Cuomo, 166 F.3d 473 (2d Cir. 1999). 8 Human Rights Watch v. DOJ Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123592 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 2 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93 (D.D.C. 2019) 9 N.