Epstein Secrets

to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at 117. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Ep

evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at 117. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Epstein at Epstein's New Mexico Ranch

tein's witness tampering as follows: "UNITED STATES vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN PLEA PROFFER" On August 21, 2007, FBI cia.gents E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and Jason Richards traveled to the home of to serve her with a federal grand 'u subpoena with an investigation pending in the Southern District of Florida. Ms.= wo

to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at ¶17. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Ep

evidence. See Edwards Affidavit, Exhibit "N" at ¶17. 75. Epstein also takes issue with Edwards identifying Bill Richardson as a possible witness. Richardson was properly identified as a possible witness because Epstein's personal pilot testified to Richardson joining Epstein at Epstein's New Mexico Ranch

's witness tampering as follows: "UNITED STATES vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN PLEA PROFFER" On August 21, 2007, FBI Special Agents E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and Jason Richards traveled to the home of Leslie Groff to serve her with a federal grand jury subpoena with an investigation pending in the Southern.District of Flor

ure. Consequently, their motion should be denied. III. THE REQUESTED DEPOSITIONS, WHICH INCLUDE DEPOSITIONS OF FBI SPECIAL AGENTS KUYRICENDALL AND RICHARDS, SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED Petitioners seek to depose four federal prosecutors (including two former United Sates Attorneys) and FBI Special Agents

nity to conduct "limited" discovery, petitioners want more, in the form of depositions of (I) FBI Special Agent E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall; (2) FBI S/A Jason Richards; (3) Jeffrey Sloman, who formerly served as both United States Attorney and First Assistant U.S. Attorney; (4) Matt Menchel, who formerly served as

obus, Wendy (USAFLS) Subject: RE: Draft Response to Victims' Motion for Production Iii Dexter — On page 2, the agent's name is Jason Richards (not Richardson) and the meeting with Jane Doe I/1 was in October 2007, shortly before the original plea date. I haven't heard back from Roy Black or Latina Belohl

f (USAFLS) Cc: Jacobus, Wendy (USAFLS) Subject: RE: Draft Response to Victims' Motion for Production Iii Dexter — On page 2, the agent's name is Jason Richards (not Richardson) and the meeting with Jane Doe I/1 was in October 2007, shortly before the original plea date. I haven't heard back from Roy Black

y of evidence, guidelines calculations." The Government is asserting attorney-client privilege regarding this e-mail. I understand the reference to "Richards' and "Kuyrkendall" to be references to FBI agents — not attorneys in the U.S. Attorney's Office. Accordingly, the attorney-client privilege would n

of Florida, Jane Doe No. 1 was contacted to be advised regarding the investigation. On October 26, 2007, Special Agents E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and Jason Richards met in person with Jane Doe No. 1 because she was recognized as a "victim' of Epstein's crime. 15 EFTA00081130 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 2

From: "Marshall, James P. (MM) (FBI)" To: "Richards, Jason R. (MM) (FBI)" Cc: "Leverock, Michael D. (MM) (F Subject: FW: help on a piece for The New or er Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2018 17:49:15 +0000 Impo

ngularly aggressive campaign, first, to thwart the investigation, and second, to subvert the prosecution. If I were able to speak with Special Agent Jason Richards--and anyone else whom you would suggest--I would want to ask questions about that process. What they learned, what they encountered, what their perc

rs. Thanks, Jason Forwarded message From: "Steinberg, Jill (USAGAN)" Date: May 14, 2019 3:40 PM Subject: Doe v. United States (Epstein) To: "Richards, Jason R. (MM) (FBI)" Cc: Good afternoon, I am writing from the United States Attorney's Office in the Northern District of Georgia. We have been

From: Jason Richards To: "Smith, Twiler V. (MM) (FBI)" Subject: Fwd: Doe v. United States (Eps em Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 20:22:50 +0000 Importance: Normal Below is t

y of evidence, guidelines calculations." The Government is asserting attorney-client privilege regarding this e-mail. I understand the reference to "Richards' and "Kuyrkendall" to be references to FBI agents — not attorneys in the U.S. Attorney's Office. Accordingly, the attorney-client privilege would n

of Florida, Jane Doe No. I was contacted to be advised regarding the investigation. On October 26, 2007, Special Agents E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and Jason Richards met in person with Jane Doe No. 1 because she was recognized as a "victim' of Epstein's crime. 15 EFTA00179713 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 2