Epstein Secrets

BOP also properly withheld records under Exemption 7(A) that could reasonably be expected to interfere with the prosecutions of Michael Thomas and Tova Noel. The Capone Declarations logically and plausibly explain why these records could reasonably be expected to interfere with Noel, including because t

ordan v. U.S. Dep't of Justice. See, 668 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir 2011) 6 Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dep't of State, 875 F. Supp. 2d 37 (D.D.C. 2012) 14 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20 Kimberlin v. DOJ, 139 F.3d 944 (D.C. Cir. 1998) 13 Knight First Amendment Insti

of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT BACKGROUND 2 I. Criminal Proceedings Against Jeffrey Epstein 2 II. Criminal Proceedings Against Tova Noel and Michael Thomas 2 III. Criminal Proceedings Against Nicholas Tartaglione 3 IV. The Times's FOIA Requests and This Action 3 ARGUMENT 4 I.

4, 17 John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146 (1 989) 4 Jordan v. U.S. Dep .t of Justice, M8 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2 011) 9, 10, 21, 22 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20, 21 Kansi v. U.S. Depst of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 1998) 8 Kay v. F.C

1 7.) An autopsy confirmed that he had committed suicide by hanging himself. (Id.) Since then, charges have been brought against Michael Thomas and Tova Noel, both correctional officers on duty at the SHU the night of Epstein's death, who allegedly failed to perform prisoner counts and then signed false

d 81 (2d Cir. 1991) 19 Human Rights Watch v. Dep't ofJustice & Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123592 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 9 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93 (D.D.C. 2019) 20 Knight First Amendment Inst. v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 407 F. Supp. 3d 334 (

of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT BACKGROUND 2 I. Criminal Proceedings Against Jeffrey Epstein 2 II. Criminal Proceedings Against Tova Noel and Michael Thomas 2 III. Criminal Proceedings Against Nicholas Tartaglione 3 IV. The Times's FOIA Requests and This Action 3 ARGUMENT 4 I.

4, 17 John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146 (1 989) 4 Jordan v. U.S. Dep .t of Justice, M8 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2 011) 9, 10, 21, 22 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20, 21 Kansi v. U.S. Depst of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 1998) 8 Kay v. F.C

BOP also properly withheld records under Exemption 7(A) that could reasonably be expected to interfere with the prosecutions of Michael Thomas and Tova Noel. The Capone Declarations logically and plausibly explain why these records could reasonably be expected to interfere with Noel, including because t

ordan v. U.S. Dep't of Justice. See, 668 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir 2011) 6 Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dep't of State, 875 F. Supp. 2d 37 (D.D.C. 2012) 14 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20 Kimberlin v. DOJ, 139 F.3d 944 (D.C. Cir. 1998) 13 Knight First Amendment Insti

1 7.) An autopsy confirmed that he had committed suicide by hanging himself. (Id.) Since then, charges have been brought against Michael Thomas and Tova Noel, both correctional officers on duty at the SHU the night of Epstein's death, who allegedly failed to perform prisoner counts and then signed false

d 81 (2d Cir. 1991) 19 Human Rights Watch v. Dep't ofJustice & Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123592 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 9 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93 (D.D.C. 2019) 20 Knight First Amendment Inst. v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 407 F. Supp. 3d 334 (

of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT BACKGROUND 2 I. Criminal Proceedings Against Jeffrey Epstein 2 II. Criminal Proceedings Against Tova Noel and Michael Thomas 2 III. Criminal Proceedings Against Nicholas Tartaglione 3 IV. The Times's FOIA Requests and This Action 3 ARGUMENT 4 I.

4, 17 John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146 (1 989) 4 Jordan v. U.S. Dep .t of Justice, M8 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2 011) 9, 10, 21, 22 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20, 21 Kansi v. U.S. Depst of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 1998) 8 Kay v. F.C

BOP also properly withheld records under Exemption 7(A) that could reasonably be expected to interfere with the prosecutions of Michael Thomas and Tova Noel. The Declarations logically and plausibly explain why these records could reasonably be expected to interfere with Noel, including because they "in

ordan v. U.S. Dep't of Justice. See, 668 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir 2011) 6 Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dep't of State, 875 F. Supp. 2d 37 (D.D.C. 2012) 14 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20 Kimberlin v. DOJ, 139 F.3d 944 (D.C. Cir. 1998) 13 Knight First Amendment Insti