Epstein Secrets

litigation. 4 The Government asserts that the work•product doctrine applies to documents prepared by ('191 attorneys in the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) in response to Petitioners' counsel's request for an investigation into the Government's handling of the Epstein case (DE 276-1 at 12-14). Alt

y the United States Attorney's Office in anticipation of possible Epstein prosecution); see Stern v. O'Quinn, 253 F.R.D. 663, 675 (S.D. Fla. 2008) (Rosenbaum, Mag. J.) (relying on allegations within pleading to decide application of work product privilege). The Court will therefore evaluate each claim of

his or her oath. 10 The DOD's failure to discipline its own prosecutors heightens the importance of the CVRA's private right of action. The DOD's Office of Professional Responsibility ('OPR") conducted a review of the Epstein case. While the Report found that prosecutors exercised "poor judgment; it concluded they did not commit

nc Court that heard oral argument in this case, both having elected to participate in this decision pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(c)(1). Judges Jordan, Rosenbaum, and Grant are recused. 1 The NPA also contained several provisions concerning Epstein's victims. The government, for instance, agreed to provide

ocuments subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 P-013227 April 23, 2008 Memo from to Privacy Act Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Reporting, Corrected Version of the previously submitted April 21, 2008 Lett Box #3 P-013226 Thm P-013230 April 21, 2008 Letter from

y the United States Attorney's Office in anticipation of possible Epstein prosecution); see Stern v. O-Quinn, 253 F.R.D. 663, 675 (S.D. Fla. 2008) (Rosenbaum, Mag. J.) (relying on allegations within 4 EFTA00086448 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 330 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2015 Page 5 of 51 plead