Assistant U.S. Attorney 500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 From: (USAFLS) Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 3:52 PM To: Paul Cassell Cc: Brad Edwards; , N. (USAFLS); (USAFLS) Subject: RE: Discovery Issues in Epstein - conference call at 5 PM today? Unfortunately, that doesn't work for us today. Can we set up a time for tomorrow? • Counselor to the United States Attorney United States Attorney's Office 99 N.E. 4th Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33132 Telephone: E-mail: <maitto: Original Message From: Paul Cassell [mailto:[email protected]]<mailto:[mailto:[email protected]]> Sent: Thursda ecember 01, 2011 2:22 PM To: .= g. (USAFLS); (USAFLS); M, (USAFLS) Cc: Brad Edwards Subject: RE: Discovery Issues in Epstein - conference call at 5 PM today? Hi and Co., Thanks for the call. Sorry I was on the other line. Can we set up a time certain? That way Brad can participate. He is in a depo until 4:30, but should be free at 5 PM your time today (Thursday). Does that work? Looking forward to chatting. PC EFTA00206076

Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 332 South 1400 East, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0730 Voice: Fax: Email: http://www.law.utah.edu/profiles/default.asp?PersonID=578tname=Cassell,Paul CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you. Original Message From: Paul Cassell Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 11:25 AM To: N. (USAFLS)'; (USAFLS)'; (USAFLS)' Cc: 'Brad Edwards' Subject: RE: Discovery Issues in Epstein Dear Mr. We will shortly be filing a motion to compel Government responses to our discovery requests — discovery which, as you know, Judge Marra has already ordered. We realize, of course, that the Government has filed a motion to dismiss/stay. But if the Government's position is rejected on those motions, then the next issue is what discovery can we expect to receive from the Government. If the motions are denied, will the Government voluntarily produce anything to us? Will the government at least agree to produce the following: (1) The Government's initial disclosures pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26; (2) Answers to all of the victims' requests for admission; EFTA00206077

(3) All documents, correspondence, and other information that the Government distributed to persons or entities outside of the federal Government or received from persons or entities outside of the federal government; and (4) All documents, correspondence, and other information covered by the victims' discovery request that is not subject to a claim of privilege. And, for all other information withheld, will the Government agree to produce a document-by-document privilege log, as required by the local rules? Thanks for your help on these questions and Brad and I have. Sincerely, Paul Cassell Co-Counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 Paul G. Cassell Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Professor of Criminal Law S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 332 South 1400 East, Room 101 Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0730 Voice: Fax: Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://www.law.utah.edu/profiles/default.asp?PersonID=578,name=Cassell,Paul CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. Thank you. From: (USAFLS) <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 12:37 PM To: (USAFLS); (USAFLS) Subject: Status of Outstanding Motions/Discovery issue EFTA00206078

Hi • and There are several motions that are fully briefed but have not been decided: DE50: Petitioners' Motion for an Order Directing the U.S. Attorney's Office Not to Withhold Relevant Evidence (this was "held in abeyance" while the Court ordered "limited discovery"). DE51: Petitioners' Motion to Use Correspondence to Provide Violations of the CVRA and to Have their Unredacted Pleadings Unsealed. DE56: Motion to Intervene by Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jay Lefkowitz DE93: Motion for Limited Intervention by Jeffrey Epstein The first three were all addressed by the Court at the August 12, 2011 hearing, although the Court allowed supplemental briefing after the hearing on DE56. The last of that supplemental briefing was filed on 10/31/2011. DE93 was fully briefed on 10/14/2011. The 90-day mark on DE93 will be January 12th. My reading of Rule 7.1(b)(3)(B) is that if there is a hearing, even with supplemental briefing thereafter, one counts from the date of the hearing, and that date has long since passed, so there is nothing to report on DE50, DE51, and DE56. With regard to the outstanding motions, there are: DE119: Our motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction was filed on 11/8/2011. The Jane Does' Opposition was filed on 12/5/2011. Our Reply has not yet been filed. DE121: Our motion to stay discovery was filed on 11/8/2011. The Jane Does' Opposition was filed on 12/5/2011. Our Reply has not yet been filed. DE128: Petitioners' Protective Motion for Remedies was filed on 12/5/2011. Our Opposition has not yet been filed. DE130: Petitioners' Protective Motion to Compel was filed on 12/5/2011. We have not yet filed our Opposition. One does not begin calculating the 90 days on these motions until briefing is completed. As to the rest of Mr. Cassell's email, I don't recall promising early discovery, I only remember promising that, if the motion to stay was denied, we would be ready with our production. Is my memory off? I was going to recommend that I talk to Brad about some of the requests and ask if they have information that leads them to believe that there is evidence to be found (for example, re Bill Clinton or Prince Andrew) so that they can point us in the right direction. I would hate for us to deny something based on my knowledge and find out later about some obscure contact in DC. Thoughts? To be ready with our production, though, I really need a legal assistant or attorney from Miami to come up here and sort through all of my boxes with me. And someone needs to order Jeff and Alex's records back from Archives (I don't know if Matt or Andy's materials are in archives or any closed file rooms). And someone needs to reach out to CEOS and the DAAG and AAG's offices, as well as DOJ Appellate. This discovery issue is going to be massive if we are ordered to respond, so it would help to have a civil legal assistant assigned. EFTA00206079