From: Laura Menninge Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2021 10:55 AM To: (USANYS) < Cc: ) < ; ; Jeff Pagliuca (USANYS) [Contractor] (USANYS) [Contractor] .c. > Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies] - Thank you for getting me some dates and times. Unfortunately something else has come up in the meantime that makes today unworkable. I will plan to be there at 10:30 a.m. next Wednesday and see how far I can get before requesting additional dates and times. In addition to my earlier questions, can you please let me know if there are Bates numbers or other production identifiers / logs for me to work off of during this review? Thank you, Laura From: (USANYS) Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2021 1:23 PM To: Laura Menninger ) < Cc: , ) ;Jeff Pagliuca (USANYS) [Contractor ontra or Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies] Laura, The items are available for review tomorrow after 11 MDT or Wednesday, September 1, after 10:30 MDT. Please let us know when you plan to do the review so I can let the FBI agent know. The review will be a u in Denver and the FBI agent ic. If you need different or additional dates/times, please let us know. will get back to you on your questions about HC materials. Best, From: Laura Menninger Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2021 12:00 PM To: (USANYS) Cc: ;Jeff Pagliuca (USANYS) [Contractor] Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies] - We are available to review the hard-drives and boots this Thursday (8/26), next Tuesday (8/31) or on September 1st. Let me know which FBI office and any local officer I need to coordinate with for entry to the building. On the topic of HC materials, I don't believe I have yet received an explanation for statement below ("I have confirmed with the FBI that the larger number contained in the 302 is accurate. I have not been able to figure out where EFTA00075651

the disconnect arose between the actual number and the number that was verbally conveyed to me, which I then conveyed to you. I apologize for the mistake, which was unintentional."). Can someone please provide an explanation for the reason those two numbers differed so dramatically? What is the current count of HC photos? Where did all of the HC photos come from? We may need more than one session of viewing, depending on the size of the hard drives. I also may need to re-review with an expert once I have had an opportunity to view any new materials for the first time. I also likely will need to sort out a method of viewing these with my client. Finally, given the volume of HC materials, offered when we were in NY at some point to specify which if any HC materials the government seeks to introduce at trial. If you are able to do that now (prior to my review), it certainly will cut-down on the time needed to review and potential expert fees. Obviously if I am unable to view the materials in sufficient time, we may need to seek extra accommodations to complete the task, and a means of reviewing these new HC materials with Ms. Maxwell, as is her right. Let me know if those dates work and an explanation. Thank you, Laura Laura A. Henninger I Partner Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C. 150 1. 10th Avenue I Denver, CO 80203 From: (USANYS) .ca Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2021 1:04 PM To: ; Laura Menninger <II Cc: c MP; < I>: Jeff Pagliuca (USANYS) [Contrac , > Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies] Counsel, We write to meet and confer about Judge Nathan's order (Dkt. No. 322) and some other issues. Please let us know if you are free to speak by phone tomorrow before 3 pm or Tuesday after 2:30 pm. Also, please let us know some dates and times that you would like to review the hard drives and boots in Colorado. Best, From: Sent: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 5:25 PM To: Laura Menninger Cc: • ; Jeff Pagliuc (USANYS) [Contr ) [Contractor] Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies] ; (USA on ra or Laura, EFTA00075652

Thank you for your email and for your patience as I track down answers for you. By the end of this week, I expect to have a production ready for you, which will contain two categories of images responsive to the discussions we have been having: • First, the production will include several thousand images that the FBI has de-designated from Highly Confidential down to Confidential. These will be produced in a format that should provide you with all available metadata together with each image. This production is the culmination of the de-designation review process that the FBI has completed over the past few months. • Second, the production will include all of the approximately 40,000 images previously produced to you, which were extracted from CDs seized from Epstein's New York residence. This production will be in a new format that should provide you with all available metadata together with each image. For this production, we will need two 500GB hard drives (one for counsel's copy and one for Ms. Maxwell's copy) on which to load the materials. I have also discussed your request that the FBI relocate certain items to the field office in Colorado to facilitate your review. The FBI is able to make such a transfer of two of the items you requested: • The FBI will send hard drives containing the remaining highly confidential image and video files seized from Epstein's devices and CDs to Colorado, where you may review them. As was the case in New York, these will need to be reviewed on a government laptop in the presence of an FBI employee and cannot be copied, photographed, or removed from FBI property. • The FBI will also send the boots that were recently taken into evidence at 1B items to Colorado, where you may review them. You may examine and photograph the boots in the presence of an FBI employee, but they may not be removed from FBI property. • The photographs provided by cannot be shipped out of the New York office because they are logged as 1A items and must remain with the case file in New York. We are happy to arrange a time for the defense to examine those photographs in person in New York. You may examine and photograph the photos in the presence of an FBI employee, with the understanding that any photographs of these materials must be treated as Confidential under the Protective Order in this case. There are relatively few photographs, so any review of these should not be time-intensive. Both of the case agents on our team are out of the office this week and next week, but we are working to find other agents who can help us coordinate shipping the drives and the boots to Colorado. My hope is that they will get to Colorado by next week. Please let me know what date(s) you would like to review those items later this month, and I will coordinate with the FBI to schedule your review. Best, Assistant United States Attorney Southern District of New York I St. Plaza New York. NY 10007 From: Laura Menning' Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2021 7:37 PM To: Cc: (USANYS) S >; I ; Jeff Pagliuc EFTA00075653

(USANYS) [Contractor] < [Contractor] >; (USANYS) [Contractor] ; (USANYS) Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies) I am writing to inquire regarding the status of the NC material review and de-designation (highlighted #2 below, from May 14) and also to discuss how we may go about reviewing the additional 30,000 HC materials that we were not made available to us when we traveled to NY for that purpose. Do you know when the de-designation process will be complete? And when do you expect the de-designated documents will be disclosed? Also, regarding the remaining HC materials (highlighted #1 below), we would propose that they be made available for our review at the FBI office here in Colorado within the next 30 days. We also would like to inspect at the same time and place (a) the originals of the VRG photos that you located after our evidence review and (b) the boots that you recently took possession of. I am happy to schedule a time to discuss logistics if that would be easier. Thanks, Laura Laura A. Henninger I Partner Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C. 150 I. 10th Avenue I Denver, CO 80203 < Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 6:15 PM To: Laura Menninge Cc: (USANYS) [Contractor] ; (USANYS) [Contractor] > Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies] Laura, Thank you for your email. Below please find updates regarding these outstanding issues: 1. I have confirmed with the FBI that the larger number contained in the 302 is accurate. I have not been able to figure out where the disconnect arose between the actual number and the number that was verbally conveyed to me, which I then conveyed to you. I apologize for the mistake, which was unintentional. 2. The FBI's review of the Highly Confidential material and de-designation remains ongoing. I have reached out to the case agent for an update on timing and will let you know when I have an estimate of when that process will be complete. 3. My office did not create the empty Excel spreadsheet. It was included on a hard drive provided to our vendor by the FBI containing the images from CDs seized from Epstein's residence and spreadsheets created by the FBI during its review of those CDs. I do not know the origins of that third blank spreadsheet, and the FBI has informed me that it only created two spreadsheets in connection with its review of the CDs. My best guess is that the blank EFTA00075654

document was a temporary file that was automatically created when the spreadsheets were copied onto the drive, but I do not know that for certain. To the best of my knowledge, there are no blank files that my office created. 4. Our paralegals have been working to look into the thousands of Bates numbers you listed as unviewable at the MDC. Attached please find a spreadsheet our paralegals created providing the status of each document. You will see that the spreadsheet is divided into separate tabs for each category of problem you identified. Next to each identified Bates number, the paralegals have noted the status of each image and/or document. Below please find a key explaining each of these different status entries: • Blanks o "Confirmed Blank" means the document has no content. o "Not Blank" means there is content to the document. For documents in this category, please let us know if you are requesting that we reproduce these documents to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. o "No Native" means there is no corresponding native with the image. o "N/A — Not PAE Export" means the document was not produced by our vendor. • Not Supported o "saf files " means we are unable to open these files on our system and are asking our vendor and IT for assistance. We will reach back out once we have obtained that assistance. o ".txt file (blank)" means the document has no content. • Can't Read — Won't Open o "Image Opens" means there is content to the image. Please let us know if you are requesting that we reproduce these documents to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. o "Image Opens — Black Box(es)" means these images contained redactions of nudity. Please let us know if you are requesting that we reproduce these documents to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. o "Native Opens" means there is content to the native. Please let us know if you are requesting that we reproduce these documents to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. o "No native" means there is no corresponding native with the image. o "Document Produced Natively" means that a cover sheet was produced instead of an image for this document. o "Corrupt" means the document has no viewable content. o "Native Password Protected" means we are unable to open this document and are asking our vendor for assistance. We will reach back out once we have obtained that assistance. o "N/A — Not PAE Export" means the document was not produced by our vendor. • Missing o "Image Opens" means there is content to the image. Please let us know if you are requesting that we reproduce these documents to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. o "No native" means there is no corresponding native with the image. We are conferring with our vendor regarding certain documents for which the image cover sheet indicates the document was produced natively but for which we do not have a corresponding native. We will reach back out once we have obtained that assistance. o "Document Produced Natively" means that a cover sheet was produced instead of an image for this document. o "Not Missing — Opens" means there is content to the native. Please let us know if you are requesting that we reproduce these documents to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. o "Image for this document is not exported" means that we do not have these images. We are conferring with our vendor regarding these documents and will reach back out once we have obtained assistance. o "Blank" means the image file is blank. o "Not Missing — Corrupt" means the document has no viewable content. • Corrupt o "Document Produced Natively" means that a cover sheet was produced instead of an image for this document. o "Not Corrupt" means there is content to the document. Please let us know if you are requesting that we reproduce these documents to Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. EFTA00075655

o "Password Locked" means we are unable to open this document and are asking our vendor for assistance. We will reach back out once we have obtained that assistance. o "Blank File" means the native file we have is blank. We are checking with our vendor for assistance with such files and will reach back out once we have obtained that assistance. o "Blank" means the image file is blank. o "Corrupt" means the document has no viewable content. o "No Native File" means there is no corresponding native with the image. o "N/A — Not PAE Export" means the document was not produced by our vendor. o "Lazer Scan" means that the file is part of the 3D scan of Epstein's private island. As you may recall, there were difficulties producing the 3D scan to counsel in a viewable format, and we reproduced these documents to counsel on multiple occasions. Within the lazer scan production there are pdf files that should be viewable and should reflect the substance of the 3D scan. Best, From: Laura Menninger Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 12:21 PM To: Cc: (USANYS) < >• • ; Jeff Pagliuc. 'Bobbi Sternheim . . . - ferral re photo an Following up on the below, as I believe these are the outstanding issues from this email chain. 1. When do you expect to have clarification from the FBI regarding the discrepancy in highly confidential material count? 2. Same for the de-designated HC materials? 3. Your answer regarding Bates-stamped but content-less files only addressed those that you took off of Epstein devices. I asked about a file that your office created — an Excel spreadsheet — that did not have content yet you Bates-stamped and produced it. Are there others? 4. When do you expect to have answers to the list of documents that our client is unable to view at the MDC? It is a few days shy of a month since I forwarded that list to you and I am hoping that you will have answers in the next few days. I will wait for answer to 1 and 2 above before I can adequately address your position on the HC materials. It may be that we need to go back to the Court to address your definition of highly confidential which is unlike I have seen on even child pornography cases. Thanks for your prompt attention to these matters. -Laura Laura A. Menninger I Partner Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C. • , CO 80203 EFTA00075656