Epstein Secrets

(Villafafia) typed notes, relevant pieces of grand jury materials, telephone records/flight records analysis charts, victim/witness photographs, DAVID records, NCICs, and related materials for persons identified as Jane Does #15, 16, 17, 18, 19, Past Employees, Misc. Witnesses Work product 6(e)

cuments subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 P-013227 April 23, 2008 Memo from Jeffrey Sloman to Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Reporting, Corrected Version of the previously submitted April 21, 2008 Letter to OPR Privacy Act Box #3 P-013226 Thru P-013230 April

Household Age 51 Median Income: $111,607 Median Home Value: $475,000 Median Education: 14 years Household Members None Listed Other Associates RODGERS, DAVID N 6:49 ZORRO RANCH RD BH STANLEY, NM 87056-9743 Address Dates Phone 49 ZORRO RANCH RD BH 7/2015 -112015 STANLEY, NM 87056-9743 SANTA F

litigation. 4 The Government asserts that the work•product doctrine applies to documents prepared by ('191 attorneys in the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) in response to Petitioners' counsel's request for an investigation into the Government's handling of the Epstein case (DE 276-1 at 12-14). Alt

(Villafaila) typed notes, relevant pieces of grand jury materials, telephone records/flight records analysis charts, victim/witness photographs, DAVID records, NCICs, and related materials for persons identified as Jane Does #15, 16, 17, 18, 19, Past Employees, Misc. Witnesses Work product 6(e)

cuments subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 P-013227 April 23, 2008 Memo from Jeffrey Sloman to Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Reporting, Corrected Version of the previously submitted April 21, 2008 Letter to OPR Privacy Act Box #3 P-013226 Thru P-013230 April

s number one co-conspirator who was actually named as such in the NPA), his housekeeper (Louel la Ruboyo), his pilots Larry Morrison, Larry Visoski, David Rogers, William Hammond and Robert Roxburgh, (Hammond and Roxburgh were not deposed, but the others were.) See depositions of these individuals in various

randum Subject Jane Does Nos. 1 and 2. v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-C1V-MARRA (S.D.Fla.) Dam April 26, 2011 To From Assistant Counsel Office of Professional Responsibility U.S. Department of Justice VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS ,AUSA 99 N.E. 4 Street Miami, Florida 33132 Attached please fmd a CD-ROM containing the victims'

's number one co-conspirator who was actually named as such in the WA), his housekeeper (Louel la Ruboyo), his pilots Larry Morrison, Larry Visoski, David Rogers, William Hammond and Robert Roxburgh, (Hammond and Roxburgh were not deposed, but the others were.) See depositions of these individuals in various

randum Subject Jane Does Nos. 1 and 2.'. United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA (S.D.Fla.) Daft April 26, 2011 To From Assistant Counsel Office of Professional Responsibility U.S. Department of Justice VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 Attached please fmd a CD-ROM containing the victims' Moti

ate 8/18/06) 8/2/2006 Subpoena to David Neville Rodgers (return date 8/18/06) 8/2/2006 Subpoena to DTG

osure is "in connection with a judicial proceeding," that is, in connection with an administrative proceeding conducted by the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) arising out of a decision by United States District Judge Kenneth A. Marra in the matter of Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2I United States, S.D. Fl

er 4th until approximately one month later, Stevens was contacted directly by Defendant James Neill's counsel, Martha Rogers, on November 3, 1993. Rogers demanded the return of the materials in James Neill's briefcase. She testified that she was advised by Stevens that such materials would be return

lly that the Court granted the government's request to supplement the record with a memorandum from Michael Shaheen of the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility. See Order of December 9, 1996. The Shaheen memorandum simply reflects his finding that the Fraud Section engaged in no misconduct), While the def