Epstein Secrets

ed States v. Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182959 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 4, 5 United States v. Noel, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.) 4 United States v. Perez, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7500 (D. Conn. June 16, 2006) 3 STATUTES 5 U.S.C. § 552 2, 10 OTHER AUTHORITIES Ali Watkins & Michael Gold, Jeffrey Eps

nforcement purposes" because they were created "in the exercise of BOP's statutory authority to detain arrested individuals." (Supplemental Decl. of Kara Christenson, ECF No. 39 [hereinafter "Christenson Supp. Decl."], at ¶ 29.) But this sweeping application of Exemption 7(A) would effectively shield every BOP r

ed States v. Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182959 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 4, 5 United States v. Noel, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.) 4 United States v. Perez, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7500 (D. Conn. June 16, 2006) 3 STATUTES 5 U.S.C. § 552 2, 10 OTHER AUTHORITIES Ali Watkins & Michael Gold, Jeffrey Eps

nforcement purposes" because they were created "in the exercise of BOP's statutory authority to detain arrested individuals." (Supplemental Decl. of Kara Christenson, ECF No. 39 [hereinafter "Christenson Supp. Decl."], at ¶ 29.) But this sweeping application of Exemption 7(A) would effectively shield every BOP r

ed States v. Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182959 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) 4, 5 United States v. Noel, No. 19-cr-830 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.) 4 United States v. Perez, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7500 (D. Conn. June 16, 2006) 3 STATUTES 5 U.S.C. § 552 2, 10 OTHER AUTHORITIES Ali Watkins & Michael Gold, Jeffrey Eps

nforcement purposes" because they were created "in the exercise of BOP's statutory authority to detain arrested individuals." (Supplemental Decl. of Kara Christenson, ECF No. 39 [hereinafter "Christenson Supp. Decl."], at ¶ 29.) But this sweeping application of Exemption 7(A) would effectively shield every BOP r