Epstein Secrets

equest Seeking Photos Of Jeffrey Epstein And Records Surrounding His Apparent Suicide (Aug. 12, 2019) 8 Nick Bryant, Here Is Pedophile Billionaire Jeffrey Epstein's Little Black Book, Gawker (Jan. 23, 2015) 16 Office of the Inspector General, Audit of the Federal Bureau of Prisons ' Monitoring of Inmate Commu

rtment of Justice's Inspector General, and the Bureau of Prisons itself all launched investigations. For his part, the President has suggested that Epstein was "killed" while in federal custody. Matt Zapotosky, Trump questions whether Jeffrey Epstein was killed in federal custody. His attorney general a

ive is his brother Mark, who has said they "were not that close" and is himself eager for more documents to be released by BOP. See Julie K. Brown, Je •ey Epstein Wasn't Trafficking Women — And He Didn't Kill Himself Brother Says, Miami Herald (Nov. 14, 2019), hups://hrld.us/3ibIANJ (noting that "Mark Epstein

m OTHER AUTHORITIES Ali Watkins & Michael Gold, Jeffrey Epstein Autopsy Results Show He Hanged Himself in

s to be released by BOP. See Julie K. Brown, Je •ey Epstein Wasn't Trafficking Women — And He Didn't Kill Hi

d 81 (2d Cir. 1991) 19 Human Rights Watch v. Dep't ofJustice & Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123592 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 9 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93 (D.D.C. 2019) 20 Knight First Amendment Inst. v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 407 F. Supp. 3d 334 (

m OTHER AUTHORITIES Ali Watkins & Michael Gold, Jeffrey Epstein Autopsy Results Show He Hanged Himself in

s to be released by BOP. See Julie K. Brown, Je •ey Epstein Wasn't Trafficking Women — And He Didn't Kill Hi

equest Seeking Photos Of Jeffrey Epstein And Records Surrounding His Apparent Suicide (Aug. 12, 2019) 8 Nick Bryant, Here Is Pedophile Billionaire Jeffrey Epstein's Little Black Book, Gawker (Jan. 23, 2015) 16 Office of the Inspector General, Audit of the Federal Bureau of Prisons ' Monitoring of Inmate Commu

rtment of Justice's Inspector General, and the Bureau of Prisons itself all launched investigations. For his part, the President has suggested that Epstein was "killed" while in federal custody. Matt Zapotosky, Trump questions whether Jeffrey Epstein was killed in federal custody. His attorney general a

ive is his brother Mark, who has said they "were not that close" and is himself eager for more documents to be released by BOP. See Julie K. Brown, Je •ey Epstein Wasn't Trafficking Women — And He Didn't Kill Himself Brother Says, Miami Herald (Nov. 14, 2019), hups://hrld.us/3ibIANJ (noting that "Mark Epstein

d 81 (2d Cir. 1991) 19 Human Rights Watch v. Dep't ofJustice & Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123592 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2015) 9 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 375 F. Supp. 3d 93 (D.D.C. 2019) 20 Knight First Amendment Inst. v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 407 F. Supp. 3d 334 (

FOIA Appeal Authority (DJ4) National Security Agency 9800 Savage Road, STE 6248 Fort George G. Mead, MD 20755-6248 Re: FOIA Case Number 76098 - Jeffrey E. Epstein Dear FOIA Appeals Officer: This is a timely appeal pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §552(a)(6), concerning the United States National Security Agency's (the "

(the "Agency") denial of a request for records within its control in Case Number 76098. I am writing this letter on behalf of Jeffrey E. Epstein ("Epstein") regarding the Agency's denial of the January 2, 2014 FOIA/Privacy act request to the Agency submitted via the Internet on January 2, 2014 and att

ead, MD 20755-6248 Re: FOIA Case Number 76098 - Jeffrey E. Epstein Dear FOIA Appeals Officer: This is a t

ead, MD 20755-6248 Re: FOIA Case Number 76098 - Jeffrey E. Epstein Dear FOIA Appeals Officer: This is a ti

fully detailed in Section II of the FOIA Request, Mr. Epstein seeks disclosure of any: records, documents, fi

. Cir. 2007). 1° See, e.g., Morley v. CIA, 508 F.3d 1108, 1126 I n . Cir. 2007) (remanding for agency to "substantiate its Glomar response"); Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Secret Serv., 579 F. Supp. 2d 182, 185-86 (=. 2008) (invalidating agency's Glomar response on basis that agency's proffered harms justifyi

1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 25 Filed 08/05/20 Page 2 of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT BACKGROUND 2 I. Criminal Proceedings Against Jeffrey Epstein 2 II. Criminal Proceedings Against Tova Noel and Michael Thomas 2 III. Criminal Proceedings Against Nicholas Tartaglione 3 IV. The Times's FO

loyees on duty the night Jeffrey Epstein died. Some of the same records could also affect the penalty phase of a pending death penalty case against Epstein's former cell mate. Congress did not intend the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., to interfere with pending criminal prosecutions.

BACKGROUND 2 I. Criminal Proceedings Against Jeffrey Epstein 2 II. Criminal Proceedings Against Tova

information, and other personal details of third-party individuals other than Epstein.4 One category of records implicates the privacy interests of Epsteies surviving family members because these records contain highly personal details about his death, including images As a threshold matter, each of the

4, 17 John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146 (1 989) 4 Jordan v. U.S. Dep .t of Justice, M8 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2 011) 9, 10, 21, 22 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20, 21 Kansi v. U.S. Depst of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 1998) 8 Kay v. F.C

BACKGROUND 2 I. Criminal Proceedings Against Jeffrey Epstein 2 II. Criminal Proceedings Against Tova

1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 25 Filed 08/05/20 Page 2 of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT BACKGROUND 2 I. Criminal Proceedings Against Jeffrey Epstein 2 II. Criminal Proceedings Against Tova Noel and Michael Thomas 2 III. Criminal Proceedings Against Nicholas Tartaglione 3 IV. The Times's FO

loyees on duty the night Jeffrey Epstein died. Some of the same records could also affect the penalty phase of a pending death penalty case against Epstein's former cell mate. Congress did not intend the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., to interfere with pending criminal prosecutions.

information, and other personal details of third-party individuals other than Epstein.4 One category of records implicates the privacy interests of Epsteies surviving family members because these records contain highly personal details about his death, including images As a threshold matter, each of the

4, 17 John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146 (1 989) 4 Jordan v. U.S. Dep .t of Justice, M8 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2 011) 9, 10, 21, 22 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20, 21 Kansi v. U.S. Depst of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 1998) 8 Kay v. F.C

BACKGROUND 2 I. Criminal Proceedings Against Jeffrey Epstein 2 II. Criminal Proceedings Against Tova

1:20-cv-00833-PAE Document 25 Filed 08/05/20 Page 2 of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT BACKGROUND 2 I. Criminal Proceedings Against Jeffrey Epstein 2 II. Criminal Proceedings Against Tova Noel and Michael Thomas 2 III. Criminal Proceedings Against Nicholas Tartaglione 3 IV. The Times's FO

loyees on duty the night Jeffrey Epstein died. Some of the same records could also affect the penalty phase of a pending death penalty case against Epstein's former cell mate. Congress did not intend the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., to interfere with pending criminal prosecutions.

information, and other personal details of third-party individuals other than Epstein.4 One category of records implicates the privacy interests of Epsteies surviving family members because these records contain highly personal details about his death, including images As a threshold matter, each of the

4, 17 John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146 (1 989) 4 Jordan v. U.S. Dep .t of Justice, M8 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2 011) 9, 10, 21, 22 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dept of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20, 21 Kansi v. U.S. Depst of Justice, 11 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 1998) 8 Kay v. F.C

dar Online submitted a FOIA requests to the FBI collectively seeking "all documents relating to the FBI's investigation and prosecution of financier Jeffrey Epstein, who plead guilty to one count of felony solicitation of prostitution in August 2006. Dkt. No. 12-2, Ex. B; see Declaration of Michael G. Seidel, da

(b)(7)(A). Many of the records sought by the Radar Online fall at the heart of this exemption, and the FBI has withheld them individually, prior to Esptein's arrest, and categorically, after Esptein's arrest. Other FOIA exemptions also justify the FBI's withholding of records in response to the FOIA re

ecords at the core of the criminal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, prior to his passing, and the current p

.4 (2d Cir. 1985), "even commonly known procedures may be protected from disclosure if the disclosure could reduce or nullify their effectiveness," Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146, 181 (D.D.C. 2004). Exemption 7(E) sets a "low bar for the agency to justify withholding," Blackwell

oceed. The Court should uphold BOP's logical and plausible reliance on Exemption 7(A). BOP's reliance on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to protect images of Epstein's body and the names of his associates was also proper. Epstein's surviving family member retains a privacy interest in the details of Epstein's su

ordan v. U.S. Dep't of Justice. See, 668 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir 2011) 6 Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dep't of State, 875 F. Supp. 2d 37 (D.D.C. 2012) 14 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20 Kimberlin v. DOJ, 139 F.3d 944 (D.C. Cir. 1998) 13 Knight First Amendment Insti

oceed. The Court should uphold BOP's logical and plausible reliance on Exemption 7(A). BOP's reliance on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to protect images of Epstein's body and the names of his associates was also proper. Epstein's surviving family member retains a privacy interest in the details of Epstein's su

ordan v. U.S. Dep't of Justice. See, 668 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir 2011) 6 Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dep't of State, 875 F. Supp. 2d 37 (D.D.C. 2012) 14 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20 Kimberlin v. DOJ, 139 F.3d 944 (D.C. Cir. 1998) 13 Knight First Amendment Insti

oceed. The Court should uphold BOP's logical and plausible reliance on Exemption 7(A). BOP's reliance on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to protect images of Epstein's body and the names of his associates was also proper. Epstein's surviving family member retains a privacy interest in the details of Epstein's su

ordan v. U.S. Dep't of Justice. See, 668 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir 2011) 6 Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dep't of State, 875 F. Supp. 2d 37 (D.D.C. 2012) 14 Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce, 337 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2004) 20 Kimberlin v. DOJ, 139 F.3d 944 (D.C. Cir. 1998) 13 Knight First Amendment Insti