Epstein Secrets

e documents being held by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the other district that is handling conflict matters. (It appears that this other office is the Middle District of Florida.) This appears to be improbable, because the conflict matters would presumably generate many documents covered by the victims' discovery

found on page 1 of the supplemental privilege log (DE 216-1), with t »lemental box No. 3 P-013282 to 1. fhe entry here reads: "7/08/08 email from A. Acosta, , and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger's letter re victim notification." In responding to defense attorney Goldberger's letter about victim

e documents being held by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the other district that is handling conflict matters. (It appears that this other office is the Middle District of Florida.) This appears to be improbable, because the conflict matters would presumably generate many documents covered by the victims' discovery

of the supplemental privilege log (DE 216-1), with regard to supplemental box No. 3 (P-013282 to 83). The entry here reads: "7/08/08 email from to A. Acosta, and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger's letter re victim notification." The log then indicates that the Government is asserting attorney-cli

e documents being held by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the other district that is handling conflict matters. (It appears that this other office is the Middle District of Florida.) This appears to be improbable, because the conflict matters would presumably generate many documents covered by the victims' discovery

privilege log (DE 216-1), with regard to supplemental box No. 3 (P-013282 to 83). The entry here reads: "7/08/08 email from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, Ki. Atkinson, and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger's letter re victim notification." The log then indicates that the Government is

e documents being held by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the other district that is handling conflict matters. (It appears that this other office is the Middle District of Florida.) This appears to be improbable, because the conflict matters would presumably generate many documents covered by the victims' discovery

rnment Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Factual Materials; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P-013279 Thru P-013280 8/15/08 Emails between A. Acosta and A. Marie Villafafia, R. Senior, D. Lee and K. Atkinson re proposed correspondence to Jay Lefkowitz Attorney-Client Privilege Work Produc

ive entity, and any grand jury investigating these (or releated) allegations, including any grand jury meeting in the Southern District of Florida, the Middle District of Florida, the District of EFTA00179741 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 44 of 64 New Jersey, and/o

l privilege log (DE 216-1), with regard to supplemental box No. 3 (P-013282 to 83). The entry here reads: "7/08/08 email from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, K. Atkinson, and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger's letter re victim notification." In responding to defense attorney Goldberger