Epstein Secrets

ty agreement between your Office and Mr. Epstein as well as the provisions of Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e). As to the NPA, you have repeatedly asserted in Doe v United States No. 9:08-cv-80736- KAM, that the NPA was a confidential document. For instance, in paragraph 6 of Document 14, your own Declaration, you stated that

well as actual transcripts, the strategy or direction of the investigation, the deliberations or questions of jurors, and the like.") (citing In.m Dow Jones & Co., Inc.„, 142 F.3d 496, 500 (D.C. Cir. 1998)); see SEC v Dresser Indust'. Inc., 628 F.2d 1368, 1382 (D.C. Cir. 1980); Fund for Constitutional Gov't v

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, No. 9:08-cv-80736- ICAM, that the NPA was a confidential document. For instance, in paragraph 6 of Document 14, your own Declaration, you stated th

s that either testified or were identified during Grand Jury proceedings are subject to the secrecy provisions of F.R.Crim.P 6(e). Ste, tg,,, In re Dow Jones & Co., Inc., 142 F.3d 496, 500 (D.C. Cir. 1998) ("Consistent with these purposes, we have recognized that grand jury secrecy covers `the identities of wit

ty agreement between your Office and Mr. Epstein as well as the provisions of Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e). As to the NPA, you have repeatedly asserted in Doe v United States, No. 9:08-cv-80736- KAM, that the NPA was a confidential document. For instance, in paragraph 6 of Document 14, your own Declaration, you stated tha

well as actual transcripts, the strategy or direction of the investigation, the deliberations or questions of jurors, and the like.") (citing in re Dow Jones & Co., Inc„ 142 F.3d 496, 500 (D.C. Cir. 1998)); sce alsq SEC v Dresser hglustr, inc„ 628 F.2d 1368, 1382 (D.C. Cir. 1980); fund for Constitutional Gov't