EFTA00013632 - EFTA00013633
This is a 2-page email chain from December 2007 regarding legal strategy in the Jeffrey Epstein case, specifically discussing the selection of a Special Master to review evidence.
The document contains email correspondence between legal parties discussing the Epstein case. It reveals confusion about whether Jay Lefkowitz concurred with Ocariz's selection and mentions Kirkland & Ellis correspondence. The emails reference a de novo review of evidence underlying a proposed indictment, including 302s (FBI forms), state grand jury transcripts, and interview transcripts.
Key Highlights
- •Email chain from December 11-12, 2007 discussing Epstein legal strategy
- •References to Kirkland & Ellis law firm correspondence
- •Discussion about appointing a Special Master to review evidence
- •Mentions of FBI 302 forms, state grand jury transcripts, and interview transcripts
- •Key people: Jay Lefkowitz, Ocariz, and Bert (likely Bert Deixler)
Frequently Asked Questions
Books for Further Reading
Perversion of Justice: The Jeffrey Epstein Story
Julie K. Brown
Investigative journalism that broke the Epstein case open
Filthy Rich: The Jeffrey Epstein Story
James Patterson
Bestselling account of Epstein's crimes and network
Relentless Pursuit: My Fight for the Victims of Jeffrey Epstein
Bradley J. Edwards
Victims' attorney's firsthand account
Document Information
Bates Range
EFTA00013632 - EFTA00013633
Pages
2
Document Content
Page 1 - EFTA00013632
From: To: ' Subject: RE: Epstein Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:48:03 +0000 Importance: Normal Yes! I originally nominated Bert, and then Jay asked if he could have a list of people from which to choose. lists of acceptable people (including two people from Podhurst) and he said "Well, we probably should just The problem only started when Bert sent a laundry list of questions that he and the firm's conflicts counsel started trying to set up a conference call. You then raised the Special Master issue, and I agreed that was llot involved and there was radio silence as they started communicating only with you. We exchanged stick with Bert." had and we best. Then ----Ori inal Messa e From: Se • • AM To: Subject: e: pstein 1 question: page 2, 3rd par. states "since mr. Ocariz had been told that you concurred in his selection ... I informed (him) of the office's decision to use a special master.. ." I'm a little confused - did Jay originally concur with Ocariz? Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld O From: To: Cc: Sent: Tue Dec 11 17:20:55 2007 Subject: RE: Epstein I am out today, but I will start pulling everything together tomorrow. We don't have transcripts of all of the state interviews, but we have audio or videotapes of all of them. I drafted the attached letter, which I would like to send to Jay. <<07121 tr to Lefkowitz.pdf» From: Se • • 7 PM To: Cc: Subject: Epstein EFTA00013632
Page 2 - EFTA00013633
In light of the recent Kirkland & Ellis correspondence I've asked a conduct a de novo review of the evidence underlying the proposed indictment. I've provided with the proposed indictment package but ca make copies of the 302s , state GJ and interview transcripts, and any other underlying investigative information that an review a.s.a.p.? Thanks, EFTA00013633
Entities Mentioned
Statistics
Pages:2
Entities:6
Avg. OCR:0.9%
Sponsored