Epstein Secrets

osition of the Assistant District Attorney charged with representing the State and instead, 1 As set forth in greater detail in Section II, infra, the District Attorney's Office was already presented with, and had already considered, much of this countervailing evidence as part of its pre-hearing investigation and di

officials and Appellant's forensic psychologist that Appellant poses a low, or "negligible," risk of reoffense. See A.53 (Letter of M. Weinberg to NYS Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders, dated Aug. 16, 2010). Less than two weeks later, on August 26, 2010, Appellant was notified that the Board had recommended a Lev

ocedure 6(e) also does not impact the planned disclosures. The victim list itself is not grand jury material, and, thus, disclosure of that list to the District Attorney's Office will not violate Rule 6(e). If you wish to supply any additional authority (other than citation to Rule 6(e) and to paragraph 13 of the Agre

nder Registry Regarding Florida Registration Level applicable to Jeffrey E. Epstein, dated August 12, 2010 A51 Letter from Martin G. Weinberg to NYS Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders Regarding Level and Designation Determination for Jeffrey Epstein, dated August 16, 2010 A53 Letter from Stephen R. Alexander,

ocedure 6(e) also does not impact the planned disclosures. The victim list itself is not grand jury material, and, thus, disclosure of that list to the District Attorney's Office will not violate Rule 6(e). If you wish to supply any additional authority (other than citation to Rule 6(e) and to paragraph 13 of the Agre

ender Registry Regarding Florida Registration Level applicable to Jeffrey E. Epstein, dated August 12, 2010 AM Letter from Martin G. Weinberg to NYS Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders Regarding Level and Designation Determination for Jeffrey Epstein, dated August 16, 2010 A53 Letter from Stephen R. Alexander,