Epstein Secrets

pstein's house. Sec In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum OLY-63 and OLY.64,Nu. F(31 07-103(WPB) (S.D. Fla. July 31, 2007). At the time she tiled Detective Recarey's affidavit, she knew it contained numerous material misrepresentations, including gross misstatements of witness statements and other evidence. Secon

Jury's indictment, the Chief took the unprecedented step of releasing his Department's raw police reports of the investigation (including Detective Recarey's unedited written reports of witness statements and witness identification information), that were later proven to be highly inaccurate transcript

d serious misrepresentations before a court. On July 31, 2007, in the grand-jury litigation arising out of this case, she filed the "Declaration of Joseph Recarey," attaching the state detective's affidavit in support of a search warrant for Epstein's house. Sec In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum OLY-63 an

aw police reports of the investigation (including Detective Recarey's unedited written reports of witness statements

prospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys) Not surprisingly, Ms. issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice

Jury's indictment, the Chief took the unprecedented step of releasing his Department's raw police reports of the investigation (including Detective Recarey's unedited written reports of witness statements and witness identification information), that were later proven to be highly inaccurate transcript

d serious misrepresentations before a court. On July 31, 2007, in the grand jury litigation arising out of this case, she filed the "Declaration of Joseph Recarey," attaching the state detective's affidavit in support of a search warrant for Epstein's house. See In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces return OLY-63 a

aw police reports of the investigation (including Detective Recarey's unedited written reports of witness statements

rospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys.' Not surprisingly, Ms. issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice

estigation involved intent with many of the same witnesses. We are aware that at least one federal interview 1 ) was recorded. We understand that Detective Recarcy provided his police report and certain affidavits to the federal authorities but did not provide the actual witness statements of the taped intervie

ftPI): told me to say I was IS because said . . . if you're not then he [Epstein' won't really let you in his house. So I said I was Ir. Detective Recarey. however. largely ignored these critical admissions in his Police Report and Probable Cause Affidavit. Q: At any time. did he speak to you and does

Beach Police Department's probable cause affidavit has never been filed with the Court. If, in fact, you are referring to the Ex Pane Declaration of Joseph Recarey that was filed in response to the motion to quash the grand jury subpoena, it was filed both under seal and er pane, so no one should have access t

rospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys.' Not surprisingly, Ms. issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice

this case, she filed the "Declaration of Joseph Recarey," attaching the state detective's affidavit in su

d serious misrepresentations before a court. On July 31, 2007, in the grand-jury litigation arising out of this case, she filed the "Declaration of Joseph Recarey," attaching the state detective's affidavit in support of a search warrant for Epstein's house. See In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum OLY-63 an

rospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys.' Not surprisingly, Ms. issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice