Epstein Secrets

e -- about the full range of topics relevant to our ongoing investigation, including events not covered by the currently pending indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell? Please note that we will interpret a repeat of your client's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in

indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell? Please note that we will interpret a repeat of your client's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to both questions. Best, Assistant United States Attorney Southern District of New York I St. Andrew'

ry written responses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigation and in civil

ered by the currently pending indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell? Please note that we will interpret a re

t's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to bo

resonates with the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication 'Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Low and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud Office (see A7-327) to the limitations and pro

ting about the full range of topics relevant to your ongoing investigation, including events not covered by the currently pending indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell. If you want to ask any questions in person or via video rather than in writing I am sure the Duke would be willing to receive your questions in tha

indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell? Please note that we will interpret a repeat of your client's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to both questions. Best, Assistant United States Attorney Southern District of New York I St. Andrew'

no utility, to your case. Our client is willing to provide you with a witness statement, addressing any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them and his knowledge of them such as may be relevant to the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell. I

onses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any EFTA00078984 purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigation and in civil

t's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to bo

resonates with the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication 'Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Law and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud Office (see A7-327) to the limitations and pro

e -- about the full range of topics relevant to our ongoing investigation, including events not covered by the currently pending indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell? Please note that we will interpret a repeat of your client's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in

indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell? Please note that we will interpret a repeat of your client's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to both questions. Best, Assistant United States Attorney Southern District of New York 1 St. Andrew'

ry written responses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigation and in civil

ered by the currently pending indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell? Please note that we will interpret a re

t's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to bo

resonates with the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication 'Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Low and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud EFTA00087837 Office (see A7-327) to the limi

ting about the full range of topics relevant to your ongoing investigation, including events not covered by the currently pending indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell. If you want to ask any questions in person or via video rather than in writing I am sure the Duke would be willing to receive your questions in tha

indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell? Please note that we will interpret a repeat of your client's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to both questions. Best, Assistant United States Attorney From: Gary Bloxsome Sent: Monday, September

no utility, to your case. Our client is willing to provide you with a witness statement, addressing any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them and his knowledge of them such as may be relevant to the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell. I

ry written responses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigation and in civil

t's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to bo

the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication EFTA00096355 'Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Law and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud Office (see A7-327) to the limitations and pro

ting about the full range of topics relevant to your ongoing investigation, including events not covered by the currently pending indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell. If you want to ask any questions in person or via video rather than in writing I am sure the Duke would be willing to receive your questions in tha

indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell? Please note that we will interpret a repeat of your client's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to both questions. Best, Assistant United States Attorney Southern District of New York I St. Andrew'

no utility, to your case. Our client is willing to provide you with a witness statement, addressing any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them and his knowledge of them such as may be relevant to the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell. I

ry written responses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigation and in civil

t's offer to answer written questions relevant to the Maxwell indictment as an answer in the negative as to bo

resonates with the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication 'Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Law and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud Office (see A7-327) to the limitations and pro

no utility, to your case. Our client is willing to provide you with a witness statement, addressing any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them and his knowledge of them such as may be relevant to the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell. In additi

ry written responses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigation and in civil

s that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them a

any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association wit

resonates with the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication `Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Law and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud Office (see A7-327) to the limitations and pro

no utility, to your case. Our client is willing to provide you with a witness statement, addressing any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them and his knowledge of them such as may be relevant to the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell. In additi

ry written responses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigation and in civil

s that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them a

any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association wit

resonates with the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication 'Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Law and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud Office (see A7-327) to the limitations and pro

ion to the criminal indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell and has also offered to answer questions in writi

t in relation to the criminal indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell and has also offered to answer questions

form that you present it. Our client has offered voluntarily to provide a written witness statement in relation to the criminal indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell and has also offered to answer questions in writing in relation to events relevant to that indictment even if they fall outside of the period of the

ry written responses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigation and in civil

resonates with the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication 'Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Low and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud Office (see A7-327) to the limitations and pro

no utility, to your case. Our client is willing to provide you with a witness statement, addressing any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them and his knowledge of them such as may be relevant to the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell. In additi

ry written responses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigation and in civil

s that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them a

any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association wit

resonates with the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication `Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Law and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud Office (see A7-327) to the limitations and pro

no utility, to your case. Our client is willing to provide you with a witness statement, addressing any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them and his knowledge of them such as may be relevant to the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell. In additi

ry written responses be treated with the utmost confidentiality, not used for any purpose other than in relation to the criminal proceedings against Ms Maxwell, and not be shared with any parties EFTA00104838 outside of your department, including complainants and their representatives in your investigatio

s that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association with them a

any issues that he may be able to,in relation to Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, his association wit

resonates with the law as set out in United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d (2d Cir.2017). We also attach an extract from the publication 'Montgomery and Ormerod on Fraud: Criminal Low and Procedure' (2008) which summarises the approach taken by the Serious Fraud Office (see A7-327) to the limitations and pro