Epstein Secrets

rection of the investigation, the deliberations or questions of jurors, and the like.'"), see also SEC v Dresser Industries Inc 628 F2d 1368, 1382 (DC Cir, 1980), Fund for Constitutional Gov't v Nat'l Archives & Records Serv. 656 F2d 856, 869 (DC Cir, 1981). See generally In re Grand Jury Investigatio

ntiality agreement between your Office and Mr. Epstein as well as the provisions of F.R.Crim.P 6(e). As to the NPA, you have repeatedly asserted in Doe v United States 9:08cv80736-KAM that the NPA was a confidential document. For instance, in par 6 of document 14, your own declaration, you stated that the NPA con

identified during Grand Jury proceedings are subject to the secrecy provisions of F.R.Crim.P 6(e), SEC v Dresser Industries Inc 628 F2d 1368, 1382 (DC Cir, 1982), Fund for Constitutional Gov't v Nat'l Archives & Records Serv. 656 F2d 856, 869 (DC Cir, 1983). EFTA00589476

tiality agreement between your Office and Mr. Epstein as well as the provisions of F.R.Crim.P 6(e). As to the NPA, you have repeatedly asserted in Doe v United States 9:08cv80736-KAM that the NPA was a confidential document. For instance, in par 6 of document 14, your own declaration, you stated that the NPA con

identified during Grand Jury proceedings are subject to the secrecy provisions of F.R.Crim.P 6(e), SEC v Dresser Industries Inc 628 F2d 1368, 1382 (DC Cir, 1982), Fund for Constitutional Gov't v Nat'l Archives & Records Serv. 656 F2d 856, 869 (DC Cir, 1983). EFTA00674726

tiality agreement between your Office and Mr. Epstein as well as the provisions of F.R.Crim.P 6(e). As to the NPA, you have repeatedly asserted in Doe v United States 9:08cv80736-KAM that the NPA was a confidential document. For instance, in par 6 of document 14, your own declaration, you stated that the NPA con