Epstein Secrets

w, the motions should be denied in their entirety. First, the non-prosecution agreement between Jeffrey Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida is entirely irrelevant to this case, and the defendant's motion fails as a matter of law. Second, the indictment is timely under 18 U.S.C

met with three attorneys—Peter Skinner of Boies Schiller, Brad Edwards, and Stan Pottinger— regarding Jeffrey Epstein. (See Ex. 4 at 1). Edwards and Pottinger were also attorneys for Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who had alleged that she is a victim of sex crimes perpetrated by Epstein and Maxwell.28 (Ex. 5 a

York. (See 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP), Dkt. 26 While, as discussed herein, the Government has uncovered evidence of a phone call from one of the attorneys, Stan Pottinger, to AUSA-1 in early May 2016, AUSA-1 has no specific memory of that call, nor did AUSA-1 provide any notes or records of that call to the team worki

w, the motions should be denied in their entirety. First, the non-prosecution agreement between Jeffrey Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida is entirely irrelevant to this case, and the defendant's motion fails as a matter of law. Second, the indictment is timely under 18 U.S.C

met with three attorneys—Peter Skinner of Boies Schiller, Brad Edwards, and Stan Pottinger— regardingJeffrey Epstein. (See Ex. 4 at 1). Edwards and Pottinger were also attorneys for= who had alleged that she is a victim of sex crimes perpetrated by Epstein and Maxwell.28 (Ex. 5 at 1).29 At the meeting, E

York. (See 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP), Dkt 26 While, as discussed herein, the Government has uncovered evidence of a phone call from one of the attorneys, Stan Pottinger, to AUSA-1 in early May 2016, AUSA-1 has no specific memory of that call, nor did AUSA-1 provide any notes or records of that call to the team worki

w, the motions should be denied in their entirety. First, the non-prosecution agreement between Jeffrey Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida is entirely irrelevant to this case, and the defendant's motion fails as a matter of law. Second, the indictment is timely under 18 U.S.C

York. (See 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP), Dkt. 26 While, as discussed herein, the Government has uncovered evidence of a phone call from one of the attorneys, Stan Pottinger, to AUSA-1 in early May 2016, AUSA-1 has no specific memory of that call, nor did AUSA-1 provide any notes or records of that call to the team worki

met with three attorneys—Peter Skinner of Boies Schiller, Brad Edwards, and Stan Pottinger— regarding Jeffrey Epstein. (See Ex. 4 at 1). Edwards and Pottinger were also attorneys for Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who had alleged that she is a victim of sex crimes perpetrated by Epstein and Maxwell.28 (Ex. 5 a

w, the motions should be denied in their entirety. First, the non-prosecution agreement between Jeffrey Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida is entirely irrelevant to this case, and the defendant's motion fails as a matter of law. Second, the indictment is timely under 18 U.S.C

urpose of further damaging a sexual 26 While, as discussed herein, the Government has uncovered evidence of a phone call from one of the attorneys, Stan Pottinger, to AUSA-1 in early May 2016, AUSA-1 has no specific memory of that call, nor did AUSA-1 provide any notes or records of that call to the team worki

met with three attorneys—Peter Skinner of Boies Schiller, Brad Edwards, and Stan Pottinger— regarding Jeffrey Epstein. (See Ex. 4 at 1). Edwards and Pottinger were also attorneys for Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who had alleged that she is a victim of sex crimes perpetrated by Epstein and Maxwell.28 (Ex. 5 a

w, the motions should be denied in their entirety. First, the non-prosecution agreement between Jeffrey Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida is entirely irrelevant to this case, and the defendant's motion fails as a matter of law. Second, the indictment is timely under 18 U.S.C

York. (See 15 Civ. 7433 (LAP), Dkt. 26 While, as discussed herein, the Government has uncovered evidence of a phone call from one of the attorneys, Stan Pottinger, to AUSA-1 in early May 2016, AUSA-1 has no specific memory of that call, nor did AUSA-1 provide any notes or records of that call to the team worki

met with three attorneys—Peter Skinner of Boies Schiller, Brad Edwards, and Stan Pottinger— regarding Jeffrey Epstein. (See Ex. 4 at 1). Edwards and Pottinger were also attorneys for who had alleged that she is a victim of sex crimes perpetrated by Epstein and Maxwell.28 (Ex. 5 at I).29 At the meeting, Ed

ll of the questions that you have raised. We would also intend to explore your earlier representation to the Court that Epstein lacks contacts with the Southern District of New York. Please let us know a date that works for you and your client in the next two weeks for a one hour deposition of Jeffrey Epstein. BOIE

nal delay with Judge Koeltl. Sincerely, /s/ Sigrid McCawley Sigrid McCawley SM/akc cc: Bradley Edwards (via E-mail) Paul Cassell (via E-mail) Stan Pottinger (via E-mail) EFTA00792781

a. The group walked out excited that New York was finally going to bring a case against Epstein. I said to David and Pete, "Don't hold your breath, the Southern District obviously doesn't know who they're dealing with yet:' The effort went nowhere, as far as the victims' attorneys know. Then, after attorneys David B

t I figure better to provide as much detail as possible. My editors are pretty interested in this one. On Feb. 29, 2016, Epstein victims' attorneys Stan Pottinger, Brad Edwards and Peter Skinner met with then-AUSA and pitched her on an investigation of the Epstein scheme. I'm told had questions about establi

ll of the questions that you have raised. We would also intend to explore your earlier representation to the Court that Epstein lacks contacts with the Southern District of New York. Please let us know a date that works for you and your client in the next two weeks for a one hour deposition of Jeffrey Epstein. BOIE

nal delay with Judge Koeltl. Sincerely, /s/ Sigrid McCawley Sigrid McCawley SM/akc cc: Bradley Edwards (via E-mail) Paul Cassell (via E-mail) Stan Pottinger (via E-mail) EFTA00613862

ninger Decl. at Ex. A. 6 One does wonder why a New York licensed attorney who claims to be practicing in the State of New York at an address within the Southern District would need to move for Pro Hac Vice admission in the jurisdiction he allegedly practices if he truly does regularly practice law. 3 EFTA00618136

ll's motion -- is a red- herring. The only documents Ms. Maxwell suggested might require in camera inspection are communications with Pottinger. Mr. Pottinger is actually an attorney, so it is possible (although suspect) that he was rendering legal advice. However, because Plaintiff failed to establish or

a. The group walked out excited that New York was finally going to bring a case against Epstein. I said to David and Pete, "Don't hold your breath, the Southern District obviously doesn't know who they're dealing with yet:" The effort went nowhere, as far as the victims' attorneys know. Then, after attorneys David B

t I figure better to provide as much detail as possible. My editors are pretty interested in this one. On Feb. 29, 2016, Epstein victims' attorneys Stan Pottinger, Brad Edwards and Peter Skinner met with then-AUSA and pitched her on an investigation of the Epstein scheme. I'm told Kramer had questions about es