FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT IN RE: STAKE CENTER LOCATING, INC., Crime Victim. STAKE CENTER LOCATING, INC., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA, LAS VEGAS, Respondent, DEBORAH A. DIFRANCEScO, Defendant-Real Party in Interest, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Real Party in Interest. No. 13-73267 D.C. No. 2: 13-cr-00089- JCM-GWF-1 OPINION Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding EFTA00179613

2 IN RE: STAKE CENTER LOCATING, INC. Submitted September 20, 2013* Filed September 26, 2013 Before: A. Wallace Tashima, Milan D. Smith, Jr., and Sandra S. Ikuta, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam Opinion SUMMARY** Criminal Law A motions panel issued a per curiam opinion denying a crime victim's petition for a writ of mandamus seeking reversal of the district court's denial of the victim's motion for forfeiture under the Crime Victims' Rights Act. The panel explained that the Crime Victims' Rights Act and the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act give victims a right to restitution, not a right to criminal forfeiture. The panel also explained that the Crime Victims' Rights Act expressly does not impair the government's broad discretion to seek forfeiture of assets implicated in an offender's wire fraud. * The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader. EFTA00179614

IN RE: STAKE CENTER LOCATING, INC. 3 COUNSEL Kenneth P. Childs, Stake Center Locating, Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah, for Petitioner. Elizabeth Olson White, Appellate Chief and Assistant United States Attorney, District of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, for Plaintiff-Real Party in Interest. Mark B. Bailus, Bailus Cook & Kelesis, Ltd., Las Vegas, Nevada, for Defendant-Real Party in Interest. OPINION PER CURIAM: Petitioner Stake Center Locating, Inc. ("Stake Center") petitions for a writ of mandamus reversing the district court's denial of its motion for forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 3771, the Crime Victims' Rights Act ("CVRA").1 In the underlying criminal action, Deborah DiFrancesco, a former employee of Stake Center, was charged with crimes stemming from her embezzlement of funds from Stake Center and other victims, and pleaded guilty to one count of tax evasion and three counts of wire fraud. Pursuant to her plea agreement, DiFrancesco agreed to make restitution to Stake ' Stake Center previously petitioned this court for mandamus, and we denied this petition as premature. See Stake Ctr. Locating, Inc. v. U.S. Dist. Court (lit re Stake Ctr. Locating, Inc.), 717 F.3d 1089, 1090 (9th Cir. 2013) (per curiam). The district court has now completed sentencing DiFrancesco, and Stake Center's renewed petition is properly before us. EFTA00179615

4 IN RE: STAKE CENTER LOCATING, INC. Center in the amount of $763,846. Stake Center moved the district court to compel the government to institute criminal forfeiture proceedings and to obtain property allegedly traceable to DiFrancesco's crimes and thus subject to forfeiture from third parties. The district court denied this motion. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3). In reviewing a CVRA mandamus petition, we need not balance the usual factors under Bauman v. United States District Court, 557 F.2d 650, 654-55 (9th Cir. 1977), but rather "must issue the writ whenever we find that the district court's order reflects an abuse of discretion or legal error." Kenna v. U.S. Dist. Court, 435 F.3d 1011, 1017 (9th Cir. 2006). Here, the district court did not abuse its discretion or commit a legal error in denying Stake Center's motion for forfeiture. First, the CVRA and Mandatory Victim Restitution Act ("MVRA") give victims a right to restitution, not a right to criminal forfeiture. The CVRA provides that a crime victim has the "right to full and timely restitution as provided in law." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(6). The Mandatory Victim Restitution Act ("MVRA") requires that a "defendant make restitution to the victim" of certain offenses. 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(a)(1). Criminal forfeiture is not, as petitioner contends, a type of restitution; "[c]riminal forfeiture is . . . separate from restitution, which serves an entirely different purpose." United States v. Newman, 659 F.3d 1235, 1241 (9th Cir. 2011). Among other differences between restitution and forfeiture, only the criminal defendant is subject to restitution, not third parties. See 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(a)(1), (b)(1) (requiring that "defendant make restitution" and "defendant" return property). EFTA00179616

IN RE: STAKE CENTER LOCATING, INC. 5 Nor did the district court err in declining to order the U.S. Attorneys' Office to commence criminal forfeiture proceedings against the Internal Revenue Service and other non-parties alleged to possess assets implicated in DiFrancesco's criminal activities. Contrary to Stake Center's argument, forfeiture is mandatory for wire fraud only if the government exercises its discretion to seek such forfeiture. See 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c); Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(a); United States v. Liquidators of European Fed. Credit Bank, 630 F.3d 1139, 1144 (9th Cir. 2011) (describing procedure for forfeiture). "[T]he Government retains broad discretion as to whom to prosecute." Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598, 607 (1985) (quotation omitted). The CVRA expressly does not impair that broad discretion. See 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(6) ("Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to impair the prosecutorial discretion of the Attorney General or any officer under his direction.").2 Accordingly, Stake Center's petition for writ of mandamus is denied. DENIED. 2 Because we decide this issue on these grounds, we do not reach the other arguments advanced by the government why forfeiture proceedings cannot be commenced in this case. EFTA00179617

EFTA00179618

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 v. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S NOTICE OF FILING OF OBJECTIONS TO PRIVLEGE LOG COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to give notice of their filing of objections to the Government's two privilege logs (DE 212 and DE 216). The objections are attached hereto. The victims are filing these objections concurrently with a motion to compel production of the materials at issue. DATED: August 16.2013 Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Bradley J. Edwards Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 524-2820 Facsimile (954) 524-2822 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: [email protected] and Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice 1 EFTA00179619

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 2 of 3 S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: [email protected] Attorneys for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 2 EFTA00179620

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 3 of 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that the foregoing document was served on August 16, 2013, on the following using the Court's CM/ECF system: Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafafia 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 Fax: (561) 820-8777 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Attorneys for the Government Roy Black, Esq. Jackie Perezek, Esq. Black, Srebnick, Komspan & Stumpf, P.A. 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 1300 Miami, FL 33131 Email: [email protected] (305) 37106421 Jay P. Leflcowitz Kirkland & Ellis, LLP 601 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Email: [email protected] (212) 446-4970 Martin G. Weinberg, P.C. 20 Park Plaza, Suite 1000 Boston, MA 02116 Email: [email protected] (617) 338-9538 Criminal Defense Counsel for Jeffrey Epstein /s/ Bradley J. Edwards 3 EFTA00179621

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 1 of 70 EXHIBIT A PRIVILEGE LOG - WITH VICTIMS' OBJECTIONS EFTA00179622

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08116/2013 Page 2 of 70 PRIVILEGE LOG - WITH VICTIMS' OBJECTIONS Key to Objections (linking to Victims' Motion to Compel Production of Docments that Are Not Privileged) Objection General Objections — Inadequate Privilege Log Failure to Prove Factual Underpinnings of Privilege Claim Waiver of Confidentiality Government's Fiduciary Duty to Crime Victims Bars Privilege Communications Facilitating Crime-Fraud-Misconduct Not Covered Factual Materials Not Covered Documents Not Prepared in Anticipation of CVRA Litigation Attorney Client Objections - Ordinary Governmental Communications Not Covered Attorney-Client Relationship Not Established Deliberative Process Objections - Privilege Not Properly Invoked Final Decision Exempted from Privilege Qualified Privilege Overridden By the Victims' Need for the Documents Investigative Privilege - Privilege Not Properly Invoked Qualified Privilege Overridden By the Victims' Need for the Documents Work Product Doctrine No Work Product Doctrine in the Context of a Claim Against Public Prosecutors Qualified Privilege Overridden By the Victims' Need for the Documents Work Production Privilege Does No Apply When the Attorney's Conduct is at Issue Rule 6(e) Court-Authorized Disclosure Not Covered Under Rule 6(eX3)(E) The Court Has Inherent Power to Release Grand Jury Materials Victims Have Properly Petitioned for the Release of Grand Jury The CVRA Gives the Court Authority to Release Grand Jury Materials Page 1 of 69 Abbreviation Inadequate Log No Factual Underpinnings Waiver Fiduciary Duty Crime-Fraud-Misconduct Factual Materials Not in Anticipation of Litigation Ordinary Government Communication No Attorney-Client Relationship Improper Invocation Final Decision Overriding Need Improper Invocation Overriding Need Claims Against Public Prosecutor Overriding Need Attorney Conduct at Issue Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E) Court Inherent Power to Release Proper Victim's Petition CVRA-authorized release EFTA00179623

ease 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 3 of 70 Grand Jury Materials Can Be Severed from Other Materials The Privacy Rights of Other Victims Government Redaction Can Resolve Privacy Concerns No Assertion of Privacy Rights by Other Victims Privacy Act The Privacy Act Does Not Apply to Court-Compelled Disclosures for Discovery Material Severable Redaction No Assertion by Victims Court-Compelled Disclosure Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 File folder entitled "CORR RE GJ 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; P-000001 SUBPOENAS" containing correspondence Work Product Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of thru related to various grand jury subpoenas and Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; P4)00039 attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Overriding Need Box #1 Operation Leap Year Grand Jury Log 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; P-000040 containing subpoenas OLY-01 through Work Product Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in thru OLY-81, correspondence and research Contains documents Anticipation of Litigation; Improper P-000549 related to enforcement of same, documents subject to investigative Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against produced in response to some subpoenas; privilege Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; and attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes Also contains documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims; Overriding Need Page 2 of 69 EFTA00179624

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 4 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-000550 thru P-000621 File folder entitled "Ritz Compact Flash SW" containing copies of a sealed search warrant application, warrant, and supporting documents 6(e) Contains information subject to investigative privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-000622 thru P-000693 File folder entitled "PNY Technologies Compact Flash SW" containing copies of a sealed search warrant application, warrant, and supporting documents 6(e) Contains information subject to investigative privilege Also contains information subject to privacy tights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-000694 thru P-000781 File folder entitled "JE Corporations" containing attorney research on Epstein- owned corporations and prior litigation Work Product Contains information subject to investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Overriding Need Box #1 P-000782 thru P-000803 File folder entitled "Capital One" containing subpoena and correspondence 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Page 3 of 69 EFTA00179625

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 5 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-000804 thru P-000854 File folder entitled "DTG Operations/Dollar Rent-a-Car" containing subpoena and responsive documents 6(e) Contains documents and information subject to investigative privilege Also contains documents and information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-000855 thru P-000937 File folder entitled "JP Morgan Chase" containing subpoena, correspondence, and responsive documents 6(e) Contains documents and information subject to investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-000938 thru P-000947 File folder entitled "Washington Mutual" containing subpoena, correspondence, and responsive documents 6(e) Contains documents and information subject to investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victiit's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-000948 thru P-000982 File folder entitled "Computer Search &" containing legal research on computer search and handwritten notes on indictment preparation Work Product Attorney-Client Contains information subject to investigative privilege. Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 4 of 69 EFTA00179626

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/1612013 Page 6 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-000983 thru P-001007 File folder entitled "Attorney Notes from Document Review" containing typed and handwritten attorney (Villafaila) notes, target letters, correspondence re grand jury subpoena Work product 6(e) Contains information subject to investigative privilege. Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-001008 thru P-001056 File folder entitled "Notes from Fed Ex Records" containing handwritten and typed attorney (Villafaila) notes and screen shots of FedEx subpoena response electronic file Work Product 6(e) Contains information subject to investigative privilege. Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P401057 thru P-001959 File folder entitled "Colonial Bank Records" containing records received in response to grand jury subpoena 6(e) Contains information subject to investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3XE); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Page 5 of 69 EFTA00179627

_ L./own-tent a4-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 7 of 70 Bates Range Description PrivideRe(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-001960 Thru P-002089 File folder entitled "OLY Grand Jury Log Vol 2: OLY-51 THROUGH" containing subpoenas numbered OLY-51 through OLY-81 with related correspondence 6(e) Contains information subject to investigative privilege. Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P402090 Thru P-002169 File folder entitled "Epstein Corporate Records: OLY-51, OLY-52, OLY-53, OLY-54" containing subpoenas, records received in response to subpoenas, and related correspondence 6(e) Contains information and documents subject to investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-002170 Thru P402246 File folder entitled "Colonial Bank" containing subpoenas, correspondence related to subpoenas, records received in response to subpoenas 6(e) Contains information and documents subject to investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition: CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-002247 Thru P-002265 File folder entitled "JEGE & Hyperion from Goldberger OLY-46 & OLY-47" containing documents received in response to subpoenas 6(e) Contains information and documents subject to investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Page 6 of 69 EFTA00179628

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 8 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 Indictment preparation binder containing: Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; P-002266 Grand jury subpoena log, evidence/activity 6(e) Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Thru summary chart, witness/victim names and Contains information and Anticipation of Litigation; Improper P-002386 contact list, attorney (Villafafia) documents subject to Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against handwritten notes, 302s, portions of state investigative privilege. Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; investigative file, attorney (Villafafia) Also contains information Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under typed notes, of individuals listed as and documents subject to 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; "Additional victims" privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 Indictment preparation binder containing: Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; P-002387 Grand jury subpoena log, evidence/activity 6(e) Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Thru summary chart, witness/victim names and Contains information and Anticipation of Litigation; Improper P-002769 contact list, attorney (Villafafta) documents subject to Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against handwritten notes, 302s, portions of state investigative privilege. Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; investigative file, attorney (Villafafia) Also contains information Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under typed notes, relevant pieces of grand jury and documents subject to 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; materials, telephone records/flight records privacy rights of victims Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized analysis charts, victim/witness who are not parties to this release; Material Severable; Redaction; No photographs, DAVID records, NCICs, and related materials for persons identified as litigation Assertion by Victims Jane Does #15, 16, 17, 18, 19, Past Employees, Misc. Witnesses Page 7 of 69 EFTA00179629

Labe v.vo-CV-ou db-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 9 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 Indictment preparation binder containing: Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; P-002770 witness/victim list with identifying 6(e) Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Thru information, sexual activity summary, Contains information and Anticipation of Litigation; Improper P-003211 telephone call summary chart, attorney documents subject to Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against (Villafazia) handwritten notes, 302s, portions of state investigative file, attorney (Villafiula) 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 #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,8 investigative privilege. Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 Indictment preparation binder containing Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; P-003212 meta-analysis charts of 6(e) Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Thru telephone/flight/grand jury information for Contains information and Anticipation of Litigation; Improper P-003545 a number of victim/witnesses, Nadia documents subject to Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Marcinkova, and Adriana Mucinska investigative privilege. Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 8 of 69 EFTA00179630

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 10 of 70 Bates Range Box #1 P-003546 Thru P-003552 Box #1 P-003553 Thru P-003555B Description FBI Reports of March 2008 interviews of additional witness/victim located in New York Printout of filenames from Federal Express subpoena response with Attorney notations Privilege(s) Asserted Work product 6(e) Contains information and documents subject to investigative privilege. Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Work product 6(e) Victims' Objections Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-003556 Thru P-003562 Document entitled "Identified Numbers" with accompanying handwritten attorney list compiled from grand jury materials and attorney analysis of records Work product 6(e) Contains information subject to investigative privilege Page 9 of 69 EFTA00179631

Lase sus-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 11 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box # I P403563 Thru P-003629 Folder entitled "Flight Manifests" containing manifests received pursuant to grand jury subpoena 6(e) Contains information and documents subject to investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-003630 Thru P-003633 File folder entitled "Recent Attorney Notes" containing handwritten attorney (Villafalla) notes regarding document review and case strategy Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Deliberative process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-003634 Thru P-003646 File folder bearing victim name containing FBI interview report from May 2008, telephone activity report with attorney (Villafanafia) handwritten notes, related grand jury material Work product Attorney-client privilege 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 10 of 69 EFTA00179632

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 12 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box III P-003647 Thru P-003651 File folder entitled "Summary of Sexual Activity" containing chart bearing handwritten title "Sexual Activity — Summary" with meta-analysis of information, sorted by name of each victim/witness, including name and identifying information of each victim/witness Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Deliberative process Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-003652 Thru P-003663 File folder entitled "Victim Civil Suits" Not privileged. Produced to counsel for Petitioners N/A Box #1 P-003664 Thru P-003678 File folder entitled "Research re JE Websites" containing attorney research Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-003679 Thru P-003680 File folder entitled "Serene Cano (N.Y. AUSA)" containing attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-003681 Thru P-003687 File folder entitled "Dr. Anna Salter" containing attorney (Villafafla) memo to expert witness and handwritten attorney notes Work product Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 11 of 69 EFTA00179633

too-KARA Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 13 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-003688 Thru P-003693 File folder entitled "ID GO Interview" containing attorney handwritten notes of interview, and attorney handwritten notes regarding potential charges Work product Investigative privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-003694 Thru P-003711 File folder entitled "Research re Travel for Prostitution" containing attorney (Villafafta) handwritten notes regarding grand jury presentation, chart entitled "Brought to Epstein's House" with handwritten notes, Message Pad meta- analysis chart, summary of evidence related to one victim/witness, and relevant grand jury information Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3XE); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-003712 Empty file folder bearing name of victim/witness Investigative privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victim who is not a party to this litigation N/A Box #1 P-003713 Thru P-003746 File folder entitled "TO MO" containing grand jury subpoenas, motion and order to compel testimony, and correspondence regarding same 6(e) Documents under seal pursuant to court order Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-003747 Thru P-003751 File folder entitled "Adrian Ross" containing subpoena and correspondence regarding same 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Page 12 of 69 EFTA00179634

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 14 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-003752 Thru P-004295 File folder entitled "PBPD Investigative File" obtained via subpoena 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3XE); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-004296 Thru P404350 File folder bearing name of victim/witness containing meta-analysis chart showing telephone calls, travel, and grand jury materials relevant to possible charges Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-004351 Thu P-004381 File folder entitled "Daniel Gonzalez Documents 53909-004" containing attorney research related to bias issue Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-004382 Thru P-004478 File Folder entitled "FEDEX" containing documents obtained via subpoena 6(e) Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3XE); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Page 13 of 69 EFTA00179635

air VO-CV-dU fib -KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 15 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-004479 Thru P404551 File Folder entitled "State of Delaware Records" containing documents obtained in preparation for indictment 6(e) Investigative privilege Work product Inadequate Log No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-004552 Thru P-004555 File folder entitled "Jet Blue Records" containing documents obtained via subpoena 6(e) Work product Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-004556 Thru P-004560 File folder entitled "FL EMPLOYMENT RECORDS" containing FDLE records on targets and witnesses obtained at attorney request Investigative privilege Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-004561 Thru P-004565 Filed folder entitled "JANUSZ BANASIAK" containing attorney (Villafafla) handwritten notes of interview Work product Investigative privilege • Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 14 of 69 EFTA00179636

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 16 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-004566 Thru P-004716 File folder entitled "JANUSZ BANASIAK RECORDS 23-0001 THROUGH 23-" containing documents obtained via subpoena 6(e) Work product Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-004717 Thru P-004722 File folder entitled "IGOR ZINOVIEV" containing attorney research regarding witness Work product Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-004723 Thru P-004725 File folder entitled "BEAR STEARNS RESEARCH" containing attorney research regarding potential witness and subpoena recipient Work Product Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-004726 Thru P-004819 File folder entitled "LAWSUITS INVOLVING EPSTEIN CORP'S" containing attorney research regarding Epstein's past personal and business litiLative practices Work Product Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-004820 Thru P-004959 Filed folder entitled "SEC RECORDS" containing attorney research regarding Epstein financial relationships Work Product Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 15 of 69 EFTA00179637

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 17 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-004960 Thru P-005059 File folder entitled "Message Pads" containing selected items from evidence obtained via subpoena Work Product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-005060 Thru P-005081 File folder bearing name of victim/witness containing correspondence with counsel for victim/witness, attorney witness outline with attorney handwritten notes, attorney handwritten notes regarding witness reports and case preparation Work Product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-005082 Thru P-005083 File folder entitled "New York Trip" containing attorney notes re witness interview Work product Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue P-005084 thru P-005107 are non responsive documents and have been removed N/A Page 16 of 69 EFTA00179638

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 18 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-005108 Thu P-005193 File folder entitled "ANNA SALTER" containing attorney research on select expert, use of experts at trials in child exploitation cases, and additional research materials on offenders and victims Work product Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-005194 Thru P-005300 File folder entitled "Extra Copies" containing meta-analysis chart and 302's of victim/witnesses used in preparing indictment package Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-005301 Thru P-005331 File folder entitled "JUAN ALESSI STATEMENT" containing transcript obtained via subpoena 6(e) Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3XE); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-005332 Thru P405341 File folder entitled "KEN LANNING" containing attorney research on select expert, including attorney handwritten notes Work product Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 17 of 69 EFTA00179639

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 19 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-005342 Thru P-005387 File folder entitled "Info re Planes" containing correspondence regarding subpoenas and documents received in response to subpoenas 6(e) Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #1 P-005388 Thru P-005442 File folder entitled "Police Reports & PC Affidavit" containing portions of police reports with attorney notes, related phone records, a list entitled "Victims" with identifying information and attorney handwritten notes, photographs and DAVID information, and additional attorney research regarding Epstein sexual activity Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-005443 Thru P-005496 File folder entitled "[Victim name] Transcript of Interview & G.T Transcript" 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #1 P-005497 Thru P-005556 File folder entitled "Bear Stearns Subpoena Resp." containing material received in response to subpoena 6(e) Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Page 18 of 69 EFTA00179640

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 20 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #1 P-005557 Thru P-005576 U.S. Attorney's Office Criminal Case File Jacket containing file opening documents, expert witness payment documents Work product Deliberative process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-005578 Thru P-005583 U.S. Attorney's Office Asset Forfeiture Case File Jacket containing file opening and file closing documents Work product Deliberative process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #1 P-005584 Ulm P-005605 File folder entitled "6001 Immunity Request" containing internal memoranda seeking witness immunity and correspondence with counsel for witness regarding same 6(e) Work product and deliberative process (as to internal memoranda) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-005607 Thru P-005914 File folder entitled "MASTER PHONE RECORDS" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data for all victim/witnesses for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 19 of 69 EFTA00179641

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 21 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-005915 Thru P-005977 File folder bearing name of victim/witness containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-005978 Thsu P-006050 File folder bearing name of victim/witness containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-006051 Thru P-006065 File folder bearing name of victim/witness containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 20 of 69 EFTA00179642

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 22 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-006066 Thru P-006220 File folder entitled "JANE DOE #4" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-006221 Thru P-006222 File folder entitled ""JANE DOE #12" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-006223 Thru P-006522 File folder entitled "CORRECTED PHONE RECORDS 5/31/0? containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to all victims/witnesses for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 21 of 69 EFTA00179643

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 23 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-006523 Thru P-006802 File folder entitled "[Victim Name] Phone Records" containing telephone records received in response to subpoena Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-006803 Thru P-006860 File folder entitled "Lists of Identified Phone Numbers" containing charts of information culled from grand jury materials, interviews, and other investigation, with attorney handwritten notes, and information to issue follow-up grand jury subpoena Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-006861 Thm P-007785 File folder entitled "EPSTEIN/KELLEN CELL PHONE RECORDS" containing documents received via subpoena with attorney handwritten notes and highlighting Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 22 of 69 EFTA00179644

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 24 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-007786 Thru P-008120 Folder entitled "OLY GRAND JURY LOG: OLY-01 THROUGH OLY-50" containing subpoenas, correspondence regarding same, 6(e) letters, attorney handwritten notes regarding records received in response to subpoenas Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-008121 Thru P-008139 Handwritten flight logs received in response to subpoena 6(e) Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Box #2 P-008140 Thru P-008298 Grand jury presentation folder containing attorney handwritten notes, typed outline with additional handwritten notes, complete indictment package dated 2/19/2008, victim list with identifying information, photographs, and summary of activity Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3XE); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 23 of 69 EFTA00179645

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 25 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 File folder entitled "FINAL P-008299 Thru AGREEMENTS" containing subfolder entitled "Agrmts Filed in State Court" (P- N/A P-008363 008300-P-008327 [not being withheld as privileged — have been produced to opposing counsel]); signed Non- Prosecution Agreement, Addendum, and operative portion of 12/19/2007 Sanchez- Acosta letter (P-008328-P-008343 [not being withheld as privileged — have been produced to opposing counsel]); subfolder entitled "12/19/07 Acosta-Sanchez Ltr" containing unredacted copies of that letter (P-008344-P-008363 [pursuant to Court's Order, not being withheld as privileged — will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by 11th Circuit]) Box #2 File folder entitled "Lacerda Immunity 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; P-008364 Thru Request" containing internal memoranda, Justice Department documentation, and Work Product Deliberative Process Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding P-008382 subpoena regarding immunity request Investigative privilege Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Page 24 of 69 EFTA00179646

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 26 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-008383 Thru P-008516 File folder containing March 18, 2008 grand jury presentation materials, including "Operation Leap Year Revised Indictment Summary Chart (by victim)," grand jury materials, draft indictments, victim reference list, grand jury subpoena log Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Deliberative process Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log, No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-008517 Thru P-008535 6/25/2007 Letter from Gerald Lefcourt to Jeffrey Sloman and Andrew Lourie [pursuant to Court's Order, not being withheld as privileged — will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by 11th Circuit] N/A Box #2 P408536 Thru P408542 Handwritten attorney notes to prepare for interview of Jane Doe #2 Work product Investigative Privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-008543 Thru P408549 Handwritten attorney notes regarding May 8, 2007 grand jury presentation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 25 of 69 EFTA00179647

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 27 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-008550 Thru P-008615 File folder entitled "Most Recent Indictment & Good Cases" containing draft indictment and legal research Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Deliberative process Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3XE); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-008616 Thru P-008686 File folder entitled "FBI Summary Charts" containing chart prepared at direction of AUSA, containing victim names, identifying information, summary of activity, and other information relevant to indictment Work product Attorney-Client Privilege 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable ; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-008687 Thru P-008776 File folder entitled "[Victim name)/Jane Doe #4" containing phone records and meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information and documents subject to privacy tights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 26 of 69 EFTA00179648

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 28 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P408777 Thru P408808 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #5" containing handwritten notes and meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-008809 Thru P408847 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #6" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-008848 Thru P-008862 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #7" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 27 of 69 EFTA00179649

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 29 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-008863 Thru P-008890 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #8" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-008891 Thru P-009103 File folder entitled "Certified Copy of State Case" containing certified copy of Epstein state criminal cases and change of plea transcript [not being withheld as privileged — copy provided to opposing counsel] N/A Box #2 P-009104 Thru P-009111 File folder entitled "Meeting Timeline" containing Villafaria typed notes summarizing meetings with opposing counsel prepared at request of R. Alexander Acosta, with handwritten correction and typed guideline estimate Work product Deliberative process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-009112 Thru P-009113 11/26/2008 Email from Roy Black to A. Marie Villafaria and Karen Atkinson re Jeffrey Epstein (work release) [pursuant to Court's Order, not being withheld as privileged — will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by Il th Circuit] N/A Page 28 of 69 EFTA00179650

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 30 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P409114 Tint P-009115 7/3/2008 Email from A. Marie Villafafia to Col. M. Gauger at PBSO re Epstein work release with attachment [not being withheld as privileged — produced to opposing counsel] N/A Box #2 P409116 Thu P-009125 12/6/2007 Letter from Jeffrey Sloman to Jay P. Lefkowitz re Jeffrey Epstein (victim notification) [pursuant to Court's Order, not being withheld as privileged — will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by 11th Circuit]) N/A Box #2 P-009126 Thru P-009134 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #9" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-009135 Thru P409141 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #13" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 29 of 69 EFTA00179651

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 31 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-009141A Thru P-009141C File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #12" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P4)09142 Thru P-009152 File folder entitled Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims containing meta-ana ysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that individual for indictment preparation Box #2 P-009153 Thru P-009156 File folder entitleatiall containing meta- ysis o phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that individual for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 30 of 69 EFTA00179652

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 32 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-009157 Thru P-009208 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #1" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P409209 Thru P409213 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #2" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-009214 Thru P-009271 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #3" containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that victim/witness for indictment preparation Work product 6(e) Investigative privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 31 of 69 EFTA00179653

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLED Docket 08/16/2013 Page 33 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-009272 Thru P-009354 File folder entitled "Purpose of Travel Cases" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-009355 Thru P-009403 File folder entitled "Interstate Commerce Cases" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-009404 Thru P-009536 File folder entitled "Attorney Conflict Research" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-009537 Thru P-009574 File folder entitled "Mann Act/Travel to Have Sex w/Minor" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-009575 Thru P-009603 File folder entitled "Travel Act" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-009604 Thru P-00971I File folder entitled "Florida Prostitution/Lewdness Statutes" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-009712 Thru P409819 Booklet entitled "Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance" [not being withheld as privileged — produced to opposing counsel] N/A Box #2 P-009820 Thru P-009965 File folder entitled "Corporate Liability Rsrch" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 32 of 69 EFTA00179654

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08(16/2013 Page 34 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-009966 Thru P410096 File folder entitled "Research re Knowledge of Age Unnecessary" containing attorney research and handwritten notes and copy of grand jury subpoena Work Product 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #2 P-010097 Thru P410276 File folder entitled "Money Laundering" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-010277 Thru P410394 File folder entitled "1960 & Aiding/Abetting" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P410395 Thru P-010488 File folder entitled "18 USC § 2255 Cases" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P410489 Thru P-010509 File folder entitled "Research re Overt Acts & Witness Testimony" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P410510 Thru P410525 File folder entitled "Extradition" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 33 of 69 EFTA00179655

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 35 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-010526 Thru P-010641 File folder entitled "Rsrch re Crime Victims Rights" containing attorney research, handwritten notes, draft victim notification letter, and draft correspondence to Jay Lefkowitz (Also contains a November 28, 2007 letter from Kenneth Starr to Alice S. Fisher, and a November 29, 2007 letter Erom Jay Lefkowitz to IL Alexander Acosta (P- 010528 thru P-010530 and P-010556 thru P-010559). Pursuant to the Court's Order, these will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by 11th Circuit) Work Product Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-010642 Thm P-01650 File folder entitled "Immunity" containing attorney research on granting immunity to witnesses Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-010651 Thru P-010659 File folder entitled "Research re G.J. Transcript" containing attorney research and draft pleadings re compelling production of grand jury transcript with subpoena Work Product 6(e) Deliberative process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Page 34 of 69 EFTA00179656

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 36 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-010660 Thm P410757 File folder entitled "Research re GJ Transcript" containing grand jury subpoena, 6(e) letters, attorney research and correspondence related to subpoena Work Product 6(e) . Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box 42 P-010758 Thru P-010793 File folder entitled "Original Proposed Ind." containing draft indictment Work Product 6(e) Deliberative process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #2 P-010794 Thru P-010829 File folder entitled "Epstein" containing sample indictments and attorney research re potential charges with attorney notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-010830 Thru P-010853 File folder entitled "1591 & Money Laundering" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-010854 Thru P410876 File folder entitled "18 USC 2425" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 35 of 69 EFTA00179657

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 37 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-010877 Thru P-010920 File folder entitled "Knowledge of Age" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-010921 Thru P-011049 File folder entitled "2423(b) Constitutionality and Purpose of Travel" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-011050 Thru P-011212 File folder entitled "Mistake not a Defense" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-011213 Thru P-011237 File folder entitled "Research re `Pandering'" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-011238 Thru P-0I 1319 File folder entitled "Research re Grand Jury Instructions" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #2 P-011320 Thru P-011361 File folder entitled "Telephone = Facility of Commerce" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-011362 Thru P-011374 File folder entitled "Def of Prostitution" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 36 of 69 EFTA00179658

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 2241 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 38 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P-011375 Thru P411456 File folder entitled "Relevant Florida Statutes" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #2 P-011457 mm P411626 File folder entitled "Unit of Prosecution Research" containing attorney research and handwritten notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #3 P-011627 Thm P411662 File folder entitled "Attorney Notes" containing attorney handwritten and typed notes Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #3 P411663 Thm P-011698 and P-012189 thru P-012361 (gap was scanning error) File folder entitled "Drafts" containing draft indictments with attorney handwritten notes, draft internal memoranda, relevant witness interview reports and grand jury material and attorney handwritten notes 6(e) Work Product Deliberative Process Investigative Privilege Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3XE); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #3 P411699 Thru P-011777 File folder entitled "6/9/09 Signed Indictment" containing signed indictment package dated 6/9/2009 with corrections 6(e) Work product Deliberative process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3XE); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Page 37 of 69 EFTA00179659

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 39 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 P-011778 Thru P-011788 File folder entitled "6/12/09 Victim Notil Log" containing chart with victim contact information and attorney notes regarding dates and type of contacts Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #3 P-011789 Thru P-011879 File folder entitled "Breach Memo" containing memorandum analyzing breach of Non-Prosecution Agreement with attachments Work product Deliberative process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials Box #3 P-011880 Thru P-011922 File folder entitled "Overt Act Lists" containing handwritten notes cross- checking all overt acts alleged in draft indictment by victim and typed overt act summary charts for indictment preparation Work product Attorney-client privilege Deliberative process 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Page 38 of 69 EFTA00179660

CasP 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 40 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 Folder entitled "Responses to Arguments Work product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; P-011923 from JE Counsel" containing: Deliberative process Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Crime-Fraud- Thru ■ 7/13/2007 letter from Lilly Ann 6(e) Misconduct; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; P-011966 Sanchez to Andrew Lourie with handwritten attorney (Lourie) notes; Attorney-Client Privilege Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against ■ 6/25/2007 letter from Gerald Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Lefeourt to Jeffrey Sloman, Matt Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under Menchal, Andrew Lourie, and 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Marie Vi Ilafarla with handwritten attorney (Villafarla) notes; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable ■ 6/25/2007 email from Andrew Lourie to Matt Menchel and Marie Villafafia entitled "Thoughts on Lefcourt's letter" Handwritten and typed attorney (Villafinia) notes regarding main themes raised by Epstein counsel Box #3 Composition book entitled "Operation Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; P-011967 Leap Yea?' containing attorney Investigative privilege Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Thru handwritten notes regarding investigation 6(e) Anticipation of Litigation; Improper P412016 and case strategy Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 39 of 69 EFTA00179661

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 41 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 P-012017 Thru P-012055 Motion of Jeffrey Epstein to Intervene and to Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas and Incorporated Memorandum of Law 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #3 P-012056 Thru P-012088 Affidavit of Roy Black, Esq. in Support of Motion of Jeffrey Epstein to Intervene and to Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #3 P-012089 Tin P412129 United States' Response to Motion of Jeffrey Epstein to Intervene and to Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas and Cross-Motion to Compel 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable Box #3 P412130 Thru P412150 Declaration of Joseph Recarey 6(e) Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty Box #3 P-012151 Thru P-012167 Ex Parte Declaration Number One in Support of United States' Response to Motion to Quash Subpoenas 6(e) Investigative Privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 40 of 69 EFTA00179662

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/1612013 Page 42 of 70 Bates Range Descrietion Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 P-012168 Thru P-012170 Ex Parte Declaration Number Two in Support of United States' Response to Motion to Quash Subpoenas 6(e) Investigative Privilege Inadequate Log No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Box #3 P-012171 Thru P-012173 Supplement to Ex Parte Declaration Number One in Support of United States' Response to Motion to Quash Subpoenas 6(e) Investigative Privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #3 P-012174 Thru P-012176 Draft of September 2009 letter from Marie Villafalia to Roy Black regarding breach of Non Prosecution Agreement with handwritten attorney (Villafafta) notes Work Product Attorney-Client Privilege Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Box #3 P412177 Thru P-012178 Undated handwritten attorney (Villaftula) notes regarding negotiations and allegations Work Product Attorney-Client Privilege Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 41 of 69 EFTA00179663

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 43 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 P-012179 Thm P4I2188 File Folder entitled "FBI GJ. Log" containing copy of FBI grand jury subpoena log with attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes 6(e) Work Product Investigative Privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #3 P-012362 Thru P-012451 File folder entitled "Key Documents" containing correspondence between AUSA and case agent regarding indictment prep questions, victim identification information, corrections to draft indictment, indictment preparation timeline, key grand jury material 6(e) Work Product Attorney-Client privilege Investigative Privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #3 P412451 Thru P-012452 File folder entitled "Victim List" containing list of victims with dates of birth and age information Work Product Investigative Privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 42 of 69 EFTA00179664

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 44 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 P-012453 Thru P-012623 Complete indictment package marked "Originals 12/12/07" Work-product Deliberative process 6(e) Also contains documents subject to investigative privilege Also contains documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(6); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #3 P-012624 Thru PA12653 Folder entitled "(Victims) Additional 302's" containing reports of interviews conducted in June 2007, October 2007, and March 2008. Investigative Privilege Also contains documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #3 P-012654 Thru P-012864 3-ring binder entitled "Child Molesters: A Behavioral Analysis" with attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes Work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Overriding Need Box #3 P412865 Thru P413226 Indictment preparation binder containing: witness/victim list with identifying information, sexual activity summary, telephone call summary chart, attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes, 302s, portions of state investigative file, attorney (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 #9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 Work Product Deliberative Process 6(e) Also contains documents subject to investigative privilege Also contains documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(eX3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA-authorized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Page 43 of 69 EFTA00179665

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 45 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 P-013227 April 23, 2008 Memo from Jeffrey Stoma to Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Reporting, Corrected Version of the previously submitted April 21, 2008 Letter to OPR Privacy Act Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Court Compelled Disclosure; Waiver Box #3 P-013226 Thru P-013230 April 21, 2008 Letter from Jeffrey Sloman to Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Reporting Privacy Act Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Court Compelled Disclosure; Factual Materials; Waiver Box #3 P-013231 Thai P-013239 April 22, 2008 Letter from A. Marie Villafafia to Office of Professional Responsibility re Self-Report of Allegation of Conflict of Interest Privacy Act Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Factual Materials; Fiduciary Duty; Court Compelled Disclosure; Waiver Box #3 P-013240 Thru P-013247 April 21, 2008 Letter from Jeffrey Sloman to Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Reporting with attachments Privacy Act Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Court Compelled Disclosure; Factual Materials; Waiver Box #3 P-013248 Thru P-013251 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant General Counsel, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated August 24 and August 29, 2011 Attorney-Client Privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver Box #3 P-013252 mm P-013253 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant General Counsel, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding Recusal matter, dated July 28, August 3, and August 24, 2011 Attorney-Client Privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver Page 44 of 69 EFTA00179666

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLED Docket 08/16/2013 Page 46 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 P-013254 Thru P-013257 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant General Counsel, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated August 24 and August 29, 2011 Attorney-Client Privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver Box #3 P-013258 Thru P-013259 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant General Counsel, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated July 28 and August 3, 2011 Attorney-Client Privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver Box #3 P413260 Thru P-013262 Email from Richard Sudder, Assistant General Counsel, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, to Wifitdo Ferrer (U.S. Attorney, SDFL), Robert O'Neill (U.S. Attorney, MDFL), Benjamin Greenberg, (FAUSA, SDFL), and Lee Bentley (FAUSA, MDFL) regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated August 24, 2011. CC's David Margolis (ODAG), Jay Macklin (USAEO), Thomas Anderson (USAEO), Michelle Tapken (USAEO), James Read (USAEO) Attorney-Client Privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver Page 45 of 69 EFTA00179667

case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 47 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 P-013263 Tluu P-013271 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant General Counsel, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding recusal of Southern District of Florida, dated July 29, 2011, with attached memorandum from A. Marie Villafafla to Benjamin Greenberg summarizing Jeffrey Epstein Investigation Attorney-Client Privilege Deliberative Process Work Product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Box #3 P-013272 Thru P-013278 Emails between Peter Mason, Executive Office for United States Attorneys, and Dexter Lee, Southern District of Florida, seeking advice regarding office-wide recusal, dated December 16 and 17, 2010, with attached letter from Paul Cassell to Wifiedo A. Ferrer, dated December 10, 2010 Attorney-Client Privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Factual Materials; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P-013279 Thru P-013280 8/15/08 Emails between A. Acosta and A. Marie Villafafia, R. Senior, D. Lee and K. Atkinson re proposed correspondence to Jay Lefkowitz Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Suppl. Box :13 Handwritten note re Epstein investigation Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Investigative privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Page 46 of 69 EFTA00179668

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 48 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P-013281 parties to this litigation Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Suppl. Box #3 P-013282 Thm P-013283 7/9/08 Email from A. Marie Villafiula to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, IC Atkinson, and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger letter re victim notification Attorney-Client Privilege Work product Deliberative Process No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Crime-Fraud- Misconduct; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P-013284 7/10/08 Emails between J. Sloman and A. Marie Villafafia, K. Atkinson, and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger's letter e victim notification Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Deliberative Process No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P413285 Thru P-013289 File folder entitled "8/5/08 AMCV e- mail re correct agrmt" containing 8/5/08 email from A. Marie Villafarla to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, R. Senior, K. Atkinson re "Jeffrey Epstein Agreement" discussing 6/24/08 email from A. Marie Villafafia to R. Black and J. Goldberger concerning the binding nature of the Agreement Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Deliberative Process No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Crime-Fraud- Misconduct; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 47 of 69 EFTA00179669

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 49 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Suppl. Box #3 P-013290 Thru P-013292 File folder entitled "8/14/08 E-mail from Left to AMCV" containing (undated) emails from A. Marie Villafafla to R. Senior, J. Sloman, A. Acosta, K. Atkinson, D. Lee re draft response to 8/14/08 email from J. Lefkowitz regarding "the December 2007 proposal" Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P-013293 Thru P-013299 File folder entitled "8/15/08 AMCV e- mail re Agape" containing 8/15/08 e- mails from A. Marie Villafafla to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, R. Senior, K. Atkinson, D. Lee re follow up on Agreement and from A. Acosta to Ann Marie Villafana on issue of Special Master with attached 8/15/08 emails from A. Marie Villafafla to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, R. Senior, K. Atkinson, D. Lee re Agreement; 8/15/08 email from J. Lefkowitz to A. Marie Villafana, K. Atkinson, IL Black, M. Weinberg re Agreement; 8/14/08 emails from A. Marie Villafafla to J. Lefkowitz, K. Atkinson, R. Black re interpretation of Agreement; email from J. Lefkowitz to A. Marie Villafafla, K. Atkinson re questions re Agreement; email from A. Marie Villafafla to J. Lefkowitz, K. Atkinson re production of Agreement to victims Attorney-Client Privilege • Work Product Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P-013300 Thou File folder entitled "8/18/08 Lefkowitz Ltr to AMCV" containing A. Marie Villafafia's handwritten draft notes for Attorney-Client Privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Page 48 of 69 EFTA00179670

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 50 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P-0133303 proposed letter to J. Lefkowitz; 5/22/07 e- mail from A. Lourie to M. Menchel, J. Sloman, A. Marie Villafafta re meeting with G. Lefcourt with attached email from G. Lefcourt re solicitation for meetings Work Product Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P-013304 Thin P413325 File folder entitled "6/25/07 Lefcourt to Sloman & Lourie containing 6125/07 letter (with handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafafia) from G. Lefcourt to J. Sloman, M. Menchel, A. Lourie, A. Marie Villafafia addressing reasons for not prosecuting Epstein; handwritten outline by A. Marie Villafarla of possible response to letter Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship Suppl. Box #3 P-013326 Tin P413329 File folder entitled "9/17/07 Villafafla Lefkowitz containing 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafaha- to IL Garcia, A. Lourie and from R. Garcia to A. Marie Villafaela concerning status of plea negotiations Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P-013330 Thru P-013333 File folder entitled "11/8/07 Lefkowitz Sloman" containing 11/8/07 letter from J. Lefkowitz re issues arising during pendency of matter with attorney handwritten notes Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P-013334 Thru File folder entitled "11/13/07 Sloman to Leflcowitz (was this sent?)" containing draft 11/13/07 letter from J. Sloman Attorney-Client Privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Page 49 of 69 EFTA00179671

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 51 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P413337 responding to J. Lefkowitz's letter Work Product Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P413338 Thru 013341 File folder entitled "12/6/07 Sloman to Lefkowitz" containing 12/5/07 faxed letter w/ cover sheet from K. Starr and J. Lefkowitz to A. Acosta [Not considered privileged. Will be produced to opposing counsel upon lifting of stay N/A Suppl. Box #3 P413342 Thru P413350 File folder entitled "12/05/07 Starr to Acosta" containing drafts of 11/30/07 letters from A. Acosta to K. Starr and from J. Sloman to J. Lefkowitz re performance and victim notification with handwritten notes and edits by A. Marie Villafaila Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P-13351 Thru P-013361 File folder entitled "12/21/07 Lefkowitz Acosta" containing handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafaila, 12/21/07 letter Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Attorney Conduct at Issue ftom J. Leflcowitz to A. Acosta re performance of NPA and appeal to Washington with attorney handwritten notes Suppl. Box #3 P-013362 Thm P413366 File folder labeled "12/26/07 Le&owitz to Acosta" containing 2 copies of draft letter from A. Acosta to J. Lefkowitz (with 12/28/07 fax header) Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 File folder labeled "Draft hr from Attorney-Client Privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Page SO of 69 EFTA00179672

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 52 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P-013367 Tim P-013372 Sloman to Lefkowitz re termination" containing draft letter dated "April , 2008" from J. Sloman to J. Lefkowitz concerning the compliance with the Agreement Work Product Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P413373 Thru P-013503 File folder labeled "6/3/08 Sloman Submission to the DAG" containing 6/3/08 letter from J. Sloman to Mark Filip, Office of the DAG, cc'd to R. Senior, A. Marie Villaftula, K. Atkinson, re Jeffrey Epstein, detailing events concerning the Agreement and thereafter and with relevant attachments Attorney-Client Privilege Deliberative Process Work Product Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P413504 Thru P413507 File folder labeled "Mtg w/ Ken Starr, RAA, JS, Drew" containing handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafttfla Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P-013508 Thru P-013514 File folder labeled "Internal Corr." containing 11/28/07 e-mails from J. Sloman to A. Marie Villaftula re responding to 11/28/07 e-mail from J. Lefkowitz to J. Sloman regarding victim notification with attachments Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P-013515 Thru Draft 11/30/07 letter from A. Acosta to K. Starr cc'd to J. Sloman and A. Marie Villafafta re compliance with Agreement Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Page 51 of 69 EFTA00179673

case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 53 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege@ Asserted Victims' Objections P-013525 and internal emails from J. Sloman, A. Acosta, and A. Lourie re items to address in letter Deliberative Process Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver; Factual Materials Suppl. Box #3 P-013526 Thru P-013527 5/23/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to K. Atkinson re draft proposed internal e-mail about handling of case and attached email correspondence between Andrew Lourie and G. Lefcourt Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials Suppl. Box #3 P-013528 Thru P-013530 P-013532 Thru P-013537 Handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafana dated 9/21 re telephone conference with possible victim representative, conflict check with names and email listed, list of names of potential victim representatives, payment discussion, and guideline calculation, email containing contact info for potential victim representative, draft Non Prosecution Agreement dated 9/10/07 4:17 pm Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P-013531 Typed note addressed to "Dear David" re response to grand jury subpoena 6(e) Investigative privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Suppl. Box #3 P-013538 Thru File folder labeled "Notes Re Post- Agreement Communications" containing Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Page 52 of 69 EFTA00179674

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 54 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P-013553 handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafafia Deliberative Process Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials Suppl. Box #3 File folder labeled "E-mails Re Plea Attorney-Client Privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; P-013554 Negotiations" containing: Work Product Crime-Fraud-Misconduct Not in Anticipation Thru Deliberative Process of Litigation; Ordinary Government ■ 11/28/07 e-mail from A. Lourie to Investigative Privilege Communication; No Attorney-Client A. Marie Villafatia, A. Oosterbaan, IL Garcia re non-prosecution agreement, with attached correspondence; Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver; Final Decision ■ 9/19/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Lourie, It. Garcia, K. Atkinson re negotiating strategy, with attached correspondence; ■ 9/18/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Acosta, A. Lourie, R.Gar ■ 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Acosta re negotiation; ■ 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafaila to R. Garcia, A. Acosta, A. Lourie, K. Atkinson, J. McMillan re negotiations; ■ 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to R. Garcia, A. Lourie re negotiation strategy; ■ 9/14/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to L Simian, A. Acosta, R. Garcia, A Lourie, K. Atkinson, S. Ball re proposed plea agreement and Information Page 53 of 69 EFTA00179675

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 55 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections ■ 9/14/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafaiia to J. Sloman, A. Acosta, A Lourie, R Garcia, K. Atkinson, J. McMillan, S. Ball re plea negotiations ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to J. Atkinson, S. Ball, J. McMillan it indictment package; ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Oosterbaan re trust agreement with attached correspondence ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Oosterbaan re trust agreement ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to R. Garcia, J. Sloman re conference call with J. Lefkowitz; ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Lourie re plea negotiations with attached correspondence; ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Lourie re charging strategy with attached correspondence; ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to K. Atkinson, S. Ball, J. McMillan re indictment package; ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, R. Garcia, K. Atkinson, A. Lourie re plea negotiations; Page 54 of 69 EFTA00179676

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 56 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections ■ 9/11/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Lourie re meeting w/ G. Lefcourt with attached correspondence; ■ 9/11/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Lourie re revised Agreement with attached correspondence; ■ 9/11/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to J. Sloman re non- prosecution agreement edits with attached correspondence; ■ 9/11/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafarla to A. Oosterbaan re status of negotiations with attached correspondence; ■ 9/10/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to J. Sloman re negotiations; 9/10/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafia to J. Sloman, J. McMillan re state grand jury proceedings; ■ 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Acosta to A. Marie Villafafia, R. Garcia, A. Lourie, K. Atkinson, J. McMillan re draft Agreement with attached correspondence; ■ 9/14/07 e-mail from J. Sloman to A. Marie Villafalla, A. Acosta, R Garcia, A. Lourie, K. Atkinson, S. Ball, re finalizing documents; ■ 9/14/07 e-mail from A. Lourie to A. Marie Villafafia re charging strategy Page 55 of 69 EFTA00179677

case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 57 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections with attached correspondence; ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Oosterbaan to A. Marie Villafaila re setting up trust fund; ■ 9/13/07 e-mail from A. Lourie to A. Marie Villafaila re final negotiations with attached correspondence; ■ 9/11/07 e-mail from A. Lourie to A. Marie Villafaiia re scheduling a meeting regarding finalizing the agreement with attached correspondence; ■ 9/11/07 e-mail from J. Sloman to A. MarieVillafaiia re non-prosecution agree ■ 9/11/07 e-mail from J. Sloman to A. MarieVillafafia re non-prosecution agree ■ 9/11/07 e-mail from A. Oosterbaan to A. Marie Villafalia re negotiations with attached correspondence; ■ 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafaiia to R. Garcia A. Lourie re negotiation strategy Suppl. Box #3 P-013609 Thru P-013615 File folder entitled "[j Target Letter" containing copy of signed letter and contact info for counsel for target 6(e) Investigative Privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Factual Materials; Court Authorized Under 6(e)(3)(E); Court Inherent Power to Release; Proper Victim's Petition; CVRA- authorized release; Material Severable Suppl. Box #3 P-013616 File folder entitled "Atty Notes re Revised Indictment" containing Attorney-Client Privilege Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Page 56 of 69 EFTA00179678

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 58 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Thru P-013621 handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafafia Work Product Investigative Privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P-013622 Thru P-013643 File folder entitled "Research Re Possible Misdemeanors" containing attorney research Work product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P-013644 Thu P-013653 File folder entitled "Notes Re Plea Negotiations" containing 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafaila to J. Richards, N. Kuyrkendall re status update; undated and typed handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafinla re items to be completed on case, strength of case, victim interviews, summary of evidence, guidelines calculations Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Deliberative Process Investigative privilege Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney- Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Suppl. Box #3 P-013654 Thru P-013745 File folder entitled "Plea Agreement Drafts" containing several draft plea agreements some with handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafafia; copies of draft non-prosecution agreement some with handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafafia; copy of a draft Information Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P-0013747 File folder entitled "Draft Non- Prosecution Agreements" containing Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Page 57 of 69 EFTA00179679

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 59 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Thru P-013810 several draft non- prosecution agreements some with handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafafia; plea sheet State Circuit Court; copies of draft Information; draft plea proffer, draft motion and order to seal; draft penalty sheet; draft plea agreement Deliberative Process Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials Suppl. Box 3 P-013811 Thru P-013833 File folder entitled "Information Packet Drafts" containing several drafts of Informations, and complete draft Information packet Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue ;uppl. Box 3 P- 013834 Through P- 013835 Two pages of filed document, D.E. 62, page 2 of 54 and page 6 of 54, containing handwritten attorney notes Any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013836 Thru P-013837 Pahn Beach Daily News Article, "Attorneys want Jeffrey Epstein Agreement Thrown Out," with attorney's notes written on margin Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P413838 Thru P413841 Letter from Paul Cassell to Wifredo A. Ferrer, December 10, 2010, Subject: Request for Investigation ofJeffrey Epstein Prosecution, with underlines, written notes, and comments by DOJ attorney Any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013842 Email from Dexterr Lee . to Ruth Plagenhoef (OPR), February 25, 2011, 4:31 p.m., Re: request for OPR Investigation — Jeffrey Epstein Non- Prosecution Agreement Any work-product Atty-client privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Page 58 of 69 EFTA00179680

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 60 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Conduct at Issue SuppL Box 3 P-013843 Thru P-013844 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Andrew Lourie, Rolando Garcia, and Karen Atkinson, September 19, 2007, 4:33 p.m., RE: Plea Agreement Atty work-product arty-client privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013845 Tluu P-013846 E-mail, Andrew Lourie to Marie Villafana, September 19, 2007, 4:21 p.m., RE: Epstein, with internal U.S. Attorney's Office e-mails attached Any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013847 Thru P413849 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Andrew Lourie, Rolando Garcia, and Karen Atkinson, September 18, 2007, 11:43 a.m., RE: Draft Agreements?, with e-mail from Jay Lefkowitz (September 18, 2007, 11:09 a.m.) attached Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Waiver Suppl. Box 3 P-013850 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Alex Acosta, Andrew Lourie, Rolando Garcia, Karen Atkinson, and John McMillan, September 18, 2007, 9:31 a.m., RE: Epstein Negotiations Atty work-product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Crime-Fraud- Misconduct; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013851 Thru P-013853 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Rolando Garcia and Andrew Lourie, September 17, 2007, 10:35 a.m., RE: Epstein [providing update re plea negotiations] Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013854' E-mail, Marie Villafana to Andrew Oosterbaan, September 13, 2007, 8:10 p.m., RE: Epstein, with e-mail from Andrew Oosterbaan (September 13, 2007, 7:54 p.m.), attached Any work-product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Jeff Sloman Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Page 59 of 69 EFTA00179681

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 61 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P-013855 and Andrew Lourie, September 10, 2007, 5:24 p.m., RE: FBI Atty-client privilege Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government ; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship Suppl. Box 3 P-013856 Thru P-013857 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Jeff Sloman, September 6, 2007, 5:47 p.m., RE: Epstein, with e-mail from Jeff Sloman (September 6, 2007, 5:35 pm.), attached Atty work-product Atty-client privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013858 Email, Marie Villafana to Jeff Sloman, September 6, 2007, 9:29 a.m., Re: Meeting on Friday any work-product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013859 Through P413860 Email, Gerald Lefcourt to Marie Villafana, Lilly Ann Sanchez, Roy Black, re: Jeffrey Epstein [Not considered privileged. Will be produced to opposing counsel upon lifting of stay) N/A Suppl. Box 3 P-013861 Thru P-013865 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Matthew Menchel, July 13, 2007, 3:14 p.m., RE: Atty work-product arty-client privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Epstein, with e- mail from Menchel (July 5, 2007, 3:30 p.m.), Villafana to Menchel (July 4, 2007, 5:16 p.m.), and Sloman to Villafana (July 3, 2007, 1:47 p.m.), attached Suppl. Box 3 P-013866 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Jeff Sloman, Matthew Menchel, Andrew Lourie, Karen Atkinson, and Shawn Ball, July 3, 2007, 6:26 am., RE: Epstein Atty work-product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Waiver, Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013867 Thin E-mail, Marie Villafana to Matthew Menchel, June 21, 2007, 3:24 p.m., RE: Meeting Next Week, with e-mails from Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Page 60 of 69 EFTA00179682

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 62 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P-013868 Menchel to Villafana (June 21, 2007, 2:58 p.m.), and Villafana to Menchel (June 21, 2007, 1:37 p.m.), attached Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013869 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Matthew Menchel, Jeff Sloman, Andrew Lourie, and Karen Atkinson, June 18, 2007, 5:04 p.m., RE: Epstein Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013870 Thru P-013871 E-mail, Andrew Lourie to Marie Villafana, May 24, 2007, 9:25 a.m., FW: Jeffrey Epstein, with e-mail from Gerald Lefcourt to Andrew Lourie (May 23, 2007, 5:00 p.m.), Andrew Lourie to Gerald Lefcourt (May 22, 2007, 6:32 p.m.), and Gerald Lefcourt to Andrew Lourie Marie Villafana, and Lilly Ann Sanchez (May 22, 2007, 2:05 p.m.), attached Any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013872 E-mail, Andrew Lourie to Matthew Menchel, Jeff Sloman, and Marie Villafana, May 22, 2007, 3:11 p.m., FW: Jeffrey Epstein, with e-mail from Lefcourt to Lourie, Villafana, and Lilly Ann Sanchez (May 22, 2007, 2:05 p.m.), attached Any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013873 E-mail Menchel to Villafana and Lourie, May 14, 2007, 10:52 a.m., RE: Operation Leap Year, with e-mail from Villafana to Lourie and Menchel (May 14, 2007, 10:38 a.m.), attached Any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P- 013874 Inadvertently marked as privileged, will be produced N/A Page 61 of 69 EFTA00179683

ease 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 63 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Through P-013875 Suppl. Box 3 P-013876 Thru P-013877 E-mail, Villafana to Lourie,Garcia, and Atkinson, September 19, 2007, 4:33 p.m., RE: Draft Plea Agreement, with e-mail from Lefkowitz to Villafana (September 19, 2007, 3:44 p.m.), and Lefkowitz to Villafana (September 19, 2007, 3:35 p.m.) attached Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013878 Thru P-013879 E-mail, Lourie to Villafana, September 19, 2007, 4:21 p.m., RE: Epstein, with c-mails from Villafana to Lourie and Garcia (September 19, 2007, 4:13 p.m.), Villafana to Louric and Garcia (September 19, 2007, 4:05 p.m.), and Lourie to Villafana and Garcia (September 19, 2007, 3:50 p.m.), Villafana to Lourie (September 19 2007, 2:36 p.m.), Lourie to Villafana (September 19, 2007, 2:33 p.m.), and Villafana to Lourie and Garcia (September 19, 2007, 2:31 p.m.), attached Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013880 Thru P-013882 E-mail, Villafana to Lourie,Garcia, and Atkinson, September 18, 2007, 11:43 a.m., RE: Draft Agreements?, with e-mails from Villafana to Lourie, Garcia and Atkinson (September 18, 2007, 11:18a.m.), Atty work-product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 62 of 69 EFTA00179684

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 64 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Suppl. Box 3 P-013883 E-mail, Villafana to Acosta, Lourie, Garcia, Atkinson, and McMillan, September 18, 2007, 9:31 a.m., RE: Epstein Negotiations Atty work-product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Waiver, Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P413884 Thu P-013886 E-mail, Villafana to Garcia and Lourie, September 17, 2007 10:35 am., RE: Epstein, with e-mail from Garcia (September 17, 2007, 10:26 am.), attached Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P413887 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Andrew Oosterbaan, September 13, 2007, 8:10 p.m., RE: Epstein, with e-mail from Andrew Oosterbaan (September 13, 2007, 7:54 p.m.), attached Any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Waiver, Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013888 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Jeff Sloman and Andrew Lourie, September 10, 2007, 5:24 p.m., RE: FBI Any work-product Any-client privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P413889 Thru P413890 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Jeff Sloman, September 6, 2007, 5:47 p.m., RE: Epstein, with e-mail from Jeff Sloman (September 6, 2007, 5:35 p.m.), attached Atty work-product Atty-client privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013891 Email, Marie Villafana to Jeff Sloman, September 6, 2007, 9:29 am., Re: Meeting on Friday ally work-product Inadequate Log No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 Email, Gerald Lefcourt to Marie Villafana, Lilly Ann Sanchez, Roy [Not considered priviloged. Will be N/A Page 63 of 69 EFTA00179685

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 65 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P-013892 Through P-013893 Black, re: Jeffrey Epstein produced to opposing counsel upon lifting of staYi Suppl. Box 3 P-013894 Thru P-013898 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Matthew Menchel, July 13, 2007, 3:14 p.m., RE: Any work-product atty-client privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Epstein, with e- mail from Menchel (July 5, 2007, 3:30 p.m.), Villafana to Menchel (July 4, 2007, 5:16 p.m.), and Sloman to Villafana (July 3, 2007, 1:47 p.m.), attached Suppl. Box 3 P-013899 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Jeff Sloman, Matthew Menchel, Andrew Lourie, Karen Atkinson, and Shawn Ball, July 3, 2007, 6:26 a.m., RE: Epstein Any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding NeediAttorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P413900 Thru P-013901 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Matthew Menchel, June 21, 2007, 3:24 p.m., RE: Meeting Next Week, with e-mails from Menchel to Villafana (June 21, 2007, 2:58 p.m.), and Villafana to Menchel (June 21, 2007, 1:37 p.m.), attached Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013902 E-mail, Marie Villafana to Matthew Menchel, Jeff Sloman, Andrew Lourie, and Karen Atkinson, June 18, 2007, 5:04 p.m., RE: Epstein Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013903 Thru P-013904 E-mail, Andrew Lourie to Marie Villafana, May 24, 2007, 925 a.m., FW: Jeffrey Epstein, with e-mail from Gerald Lefcourt to Andrew Lourie (May 23, 2007, 5:00 p.m.), Andrew Lourie to Gerald Lefcourt (May 22, 2007, 6:32 p.m.), and Gerald Lefcourt to Andrew Lourie Marie Villafana, and Lilly Ann Any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Waiver, Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Page 64 of 69 EFTA00179686

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 66 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Sanchez (May 22, 2007, 2:05 p.m.), attached Suppl. Box 3 P-013905 E-mail, Andrew Lourie to Matthew Menchel, Jeff Sloman, and Marie Villafana, May 22, 2007, 3:11 p.m., FW: Jeffrey Epstein, with e-mail from Lefcourt to Lourie, Villafana, and Lilly Ann Sanchez (May 22, 2007, 2:05 p.m.), attached Atty work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013906 E-mail Menchel to Villafana and Lourie, May 14, 2007, 10:52 a.m., RE: Operation Leap Year, with e-mail from Villafana to Lourie and Menchel (May 14, 2007, 10:38 a.m.), attached Any work-product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P- 013907 Through P-013908 Inadvertently marked as privileged, will be produced N/A Suppl. Box 3 P-013909 Thru P-013911 Memorandum, Lisa Howard, Assistant Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), to Ruth Plagenhoef, Acting Associate Counsel, OPR, undated, Subject: Recommendation Deliberative Process Privilege; atty work- product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Improper Invocation; Final Decision; Waiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013912 Thru P-013914 Memorandum, Lisa Howard, Assistant Counsel, OPR, to Ruth Plagenhoef, Acting Associate Counsel, OPR, Subject: Recommendation, with handwritten note dated 5/4/11 Deliberative Process Privilege, atty work- product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Improper Invocation; Waiver; Final Decision; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 Memorandum, Lisa Howard, Assistant Deliberative Process Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Page 65 of 69 EFTA00179687

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 67 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P-013915 Thru P-013918 Counsel, OPR, to Ruth Plagenhoef, Acting Associate Counsel, OPR, Subject: Recommendation, with two post-it notes attached with handwritten attorney notations, and handwritten notations, underlines, and circled text throughout the body of the two page memorandum Privilege; any work- product Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Improper Invocation; Waiver; Final Decision; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013919 Thru P4I3921 Draft letter, marked "Confidential", from Robin C. Ashton, Counsel, Office of Professional Responsibility to Wifredo A. Ferrer, United States Attorney, with handwritten corrections, strikethroughs, and added text Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver; Final Decision Suppl. Box 3 P-013922 Thru P-013924 Draft Letter, marked "Confidential", from Robin C. Ashton, to Wifredo A. Ferrer, with handwritten corrections Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013925 Thru P-013927 Draft Letter, from Robin C. Ashton to Professor Paul G. Cassell, with handwritten correction Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013928 Thm P4I3930 Draft Letter, from Robin C. Ashton to Professor Paul G. Cassell, with handwritten corrections Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P4I3931 Tim P-013933 Draft Letter, from Robin C. Ashton to Professor Paul G. Cassell, with handwritten corrections, circled text, Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Page 66 of 69 EFTA00179688

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 68 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections strikethroughs, and additional text Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013934 Thru P-013936 Draft Letter, marked "Confidential," from Robin C. Ashton to Wifredo A. Fetter, with handwritten corrections Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013937 Thru P-013939 Draft Letter, Robin C. Ashton to Professor Paul G. Cassell, with handwritten corrections Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver Suppl. Box 3 P-013940 Thru P-013942 Draft Letter, marked "Confidential: To Be Opened by Addressee Only," Robin C. Ashton to Wifredo A. Ferrer, with handwritten corrections - Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney Work Product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Crime-Fraud- Misconduct Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Waiver; Final Decision; Factual Materials Suppl. Box 3 P-013943 E-mail, Ruth Plagenhoef to Lisa Howard, May 5, 2011, 11:19 a.m., RE: Re-write of Epstein letters for your review, with e-mail from Lisa Howard to Ruth Plagenhoef (May 5, 2011, 11:08 am.), and Plagenhoef to Howard (May 5, 2011, 11:10 am.), and Howard to Plagenhoef (May 5, 2011, 10:41 a.m.), attached Deliberative Process Privilege Attorney Work Product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Final Decision; Waiver Suppl. Box 3 P-013944 E-mail, Plagenhoef to Howard, May 5, 2011, 11:17 a.m., RE: Re-write of Epstein lett your review, with e-mail from Howard to Plagenhoef (May 5, 2011, 11:08 Deliberative Process Privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Final Decision; Waiver Page 67 of 69 EFTA00179689

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 69 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Plagenhoef to Howard (May 5, 2011, 11:01 a.m.), and Howard to Plagenhoef (May 5, 2011,10:41), attached Suppl. Box 3 P-013945 E-mail, Plagenhoef to Howard, May 4, 2011, 5:01 p.m., RE: draft letters in Epstein matter, with e-mail from Howard to Plagenhoef (May 4, 2011, 4:57 p.m.), attached Deliberative Process Privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need Suppl. Box 3 P-013946 E-mail, Plagenhoef to Robin C. Ashton, May 4, 2011, 4:08 p.m., RE: FYI on the Florida matter Law Enforcement investigatory record, atty work product; deliberative process privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Attorney Conduct at Issue; Final Decision; Waiver Suppl. Box 3 P-013947 E-mail, Paul Cassell to Plagenhoef, May 3, 2011,12:23 pan., RE: OPR Inquiry — request for information, with post-it note attached with handwritten attorney notes on telephone call between Plagenhoef and Howard with Dexter Lee and Marie Villafana any work product; law enforcement investigatiory record No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Not in Anticipation of Litigation; Improper Invocation; Overriding Need; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Attorney Conduct at Issue; Factual Materials; Final Decision Suppl. Box 3 P-013948 Thru P-013951 E-mail, Plagenhoef to Howard and Robin C. Ashton, May 3, 2011, 12:30 p.m., FW: OPR Inquiry — request for information, with attached e-mails. Handwritten attorney notes on margin any work-product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 P-013952 Thru P-013953 E-mail, Dexter Lee to Ruth Plagenhoef, March 16, 2011, 10:52 a.m., RE: Referral of Cassell Request for Investigation, with e-mail from Paul Cassell to Dexter Lee and Marie Villafana (March 15, 2011, 7:21 p.m.), attached atty work-product; atty- client privilege No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Ordinary Government Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 E-mail, Plagenhoef to Neil Hurley, OPR, atty work-product, atty- Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; Page 68 of 69 EFTA00179690

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 224-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 70 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections P-013954 December 16, 2010, 10:59 a.m., FW: OPR client privilege Fiduciary Duty; Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Thru Referral — Allegation of Misconduct — Factual Materials; Ordinary Government P-013955 U.S. Attorney's Office, S.D.Fla., with e- mail from Dexter Lee to Plagenhoef Communication; No Attorney-Client Relationship; Waiver; Claims Against Public (December 16, 2010, 10:22 a.m.), attached. Handwritten attorney notations. Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box 3 Fourteen (14) pages of handwritten any work-product Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings; P-013956 attorney notes on case, telephone Fiduciary Duty; Material Severable; Crime- Thru interviews with DOJ attorneys Fraud-Misconduct; Factual Materials; Claims P-013846 Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct At Issue. Page 69 of 69 EFTA00179691

I EFTA00179692

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 5 of 10 not to provide legal advice or assistance to the police officers but rather to provide the city with information relating to alleged indiscretion within the department). Attorney-Client Relationship Not Established. Any attorney-client privilege has not been properly invoked because the Government has not provided factual material identifying who is the attorney, who is the client, and how the communications were confidential. See Bogle v. McClure, 332 F.3d 1347, 1358 (11th Cir. 2003). 13. Deliberative Process Privilege Privilege Not Properly Invoked - Any deliberative process privilege has not been properly asserted, because it must be asserted by the head of the department having control over the requested information who must explain why revealing the information would compromise deliberative processes. See Landry v. F.D.LC., 204 F.3d 1125, 1135 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Final Decision Exempted from Privilege — Any deliberative process privilege would only cover only the processes by which a decision was made, not the final decision itself. See, e.g., NLRB v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. 132, 151-52 (1975). Qualified Privilege Overridden By the Victims' Need for the Documents — Any deliberative process privilege would be a qualified privilege, which would be overridden by the victims' compelling need to obtain the materials here. See, e.g., Newport Pac., Inc. v. County of San Diego, 200 F.R.D. 628, 638-41 (S.D. Cal. 2001) (in action charging county Board of Supervisors with violating Federal Fair Housing Act, the interest in free expression by policy makers during the deliberative process leading up to those actions was outweighed by the litigant's interest in obtaining information concerning those deliberations). C. Investigative Privilege 4 EFTA00179693

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 6 of 10 Privilege Not Properly Invoked - Any investigative privilege has not been properly asserted, because it must be asserted by the head of the department having control over the requested information who must explain why revealing the information would compromise deliberative processes. See Landry v. FDIC., 204 F.3d 1125, 1135 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Qualified Privilege Overridden By the Victims' Need for the Documents — Any investigative privilege would be a qualified privilege, in which the public interest in nondisclosure must be balanced against the need of a particular litigant for access to the privileged information. Tuite v. Henry, 98 F.3d 1411, 1418 (D.C. Cir. 1996). The balancing is ordinarily made by considering the ten factors identified in Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339, 344 (E.D. Pa. 1973). Those ten factors decisively tip in favor of the victims receiving access to the information. D. Work Product Doctrine. No Work Product Doctrine in the Context of a Claim Against Public Prosecutors — The work product doctrine does not apply to claims advanced by crime victims that federal prosecutors have violated thcir public responsibilities under the Crime Victims' Rights Act. See U.S. v. Arthur Young & Co., 465 U.S. 805, 817 (1984) (refusing to extend work product privilege to public accountants, because they have 'a public responsibility transcending any employment relationship with the client"); In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 112 F.3d at 919-21 ("the strong public interest in honest government and in exposing wrongdoing by public officials would be ill- served by recognition of a governmental attorney-client privilege applicable in criminal proceedings inquiring into the actions of public officials."). 5 EFTA00179694

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 7 of 10 Qualified Privilege Overridden By the Victims' Need for the Documents — The work product doctrine is a qualified privilege that can be overcome where a litigant shows it has a substantial need for the materials and that it has exhausted other means of obtaining the relevant information it seeks. In re Grand Jury Subpoena Dated July 6, 2005, 510 F.3d 180, 185-86 (2d Cir. 2007). The victims here can make this showing. Work Production Privilege Does Not Apply When the Attorney's Conduct is at Issue — If the attorney's conduct is a central issue in the case, the work-production protection does not apply. See, e.g., In re John Doe, 662 F.2d 1073, 1080 (4th Cir. 1981); Charlotte Moto• Speedway, Inc. v. International Ins. Co., 125 F.R.D. 127, 130 (M.D.N.C. 1989). E Rule 6(c) — Grand Jury Secrecy Court-Authorized Disclosure Not Covered Under Rule 6(e)(3)(E) — The Court can authorize disclosure of grand jury materials pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(3)(E). It has already authorized disclosure of grand jury materials here, and the Government has no independent "privilege" to interpose against court-ordered disclosure of grand jury materials. The Court Has Inherent Power to Release Grand Jury Materials — The Court has "inherent power beyond the literal wording of Rule 6(e)(3) to disclose grand jury material" and has properly exercised that power here. United States v. Aisenberg, 358 F.3d 1327, 1347 (11th Cir. 2004). Victims Have Properly Petitioned for the Release of Grand Jury Materials — A litigant can petition for release of grand jury materials. Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(3)(F). The Court has properly granted the victims petition for release of the materials. They have also concurrently-filed such a petition. 6 EFTA00179695

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 8 of 10 The CVRA Gives the Court Authority to Release Grand Jury Materials — The Court is obligated to enforce crime victims' rights. 18 U.S.C. § 3771(6)(1) (the court "shall ensure" that crime victims receive their rights). This obligation carries with it authority to release necessary materials to protect victims' rights, including grand jury materials. Grand Jury Materials Can Be Severed from Other Materials — The Government can redact grand jury information from the requested materials, and produce the remaining materials. See, e.g., In re Grand Jury Investigation, 445 F.3d 266, 280 (3rd Cir. 2006). F. The Privacy Rights of Other Victims Government Redaction Can Resolve Privacy Concerns. The Government cannot withhold materials in this case because of the privacy rights of other victims when it has the simple option of simply redacting the names and identifying information of these other victims before producing the materials. The Government has already followed this procedure elsewhere and should do so here. See, e.g., Bates 000966-67 (materials about victim "B.B."). No Assertion of Privacy Rights by Other Victims. Several of the victims cited by the Government are represented by undersigned counsel and do not wish to interpose privacy rights here. Nor has the Government established that they can assert the privacy rights of other victims. G. The Privacy Act The Privacy Act Does Not Apply in the Context of Court-Compelled Disclosures for Discovery. See 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(11). CONCLUSION Because the Government's assertions of privilege are not well-founded, the Court should provide all of the documents the Government submitted for in camera inspection to the victims. 7 EFTA00179696

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 9 of 10 DATED: August 16. 2013 Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Bradley J. Edwards Bradley J. Edwards FARMER, JAFFE, WE1SSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L. 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone (954) 524-2820 Facsimile (954) 524-2822 Florida Bar No.: 542075 E-mail: [email protected] and Paul G. Cassell Pro Hac Vice S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah 332 S. 1400 E. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Telephone: 801-585-5202 Facsimile: 801-585-6833 E-Mail: [email protected] Attorneys for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 8 EFTA00179697

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 10 of 10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that the foregoing document was served on August 16, 2013, on the following using the Court's CM/ECF system: Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafafla Assistant U.S. Attorneys 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 E-mail: [email protected] Attorneys for the Government Roy Black, Esq. Jackie Perczek, Esq. Black, Srcbnick, Kornspan & Stumpf, P.A. 201 South Biscayne Boulevard Suite 1300 Miami, FL 33131 Email: [email protected] (305) 37106421 (305) 358-2006 Jay P. Lefkowitz Kirkland & Ellis, LLP 601 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Email: [email protected] (212) 446-4970 Martin G. Weinberg, P.C. 20 Park Plaza Suite 1000 Boston, MA 02116 Email: [email protected] (617) 227-3700 (617) 338-9538 Criminal Defense Counsel for Jeffrey Epstein Is/ Bradley J. Edwa ds 9 EFTA00179698

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 1 of 64 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE No. I and JANE DOE No. 2 r. UNITED STATES AFFIDAVIT OF BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQ. REGARDING NEED FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 1. I, Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. Along with co-counsel, I represent Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 (as referred to as "the victims") in the above-listed action to enforce their rights under the Crime Victims Rights Act (CVRA). I also represented them (and several other victims) in civil suits against Jeffrey Epstein for sexually abusing them. I am also familiar with the criminal justice system, having served as state prosecutor in the Broward County State Attorney's Office. 2. This affidavit covers factual issues regarding the Government's assertions of privilege to more than 13,000 pages of documents it has produced for in camera inspection in this case. This affidavit provides factual information demonstrating that the Government's assertions of privilege are not well founded. It further demonstrates that the victims have a compelling and substantial need for the information requested and have no other way of obtaining the information. Background Reeardina Unsuccessful Efforts to Reach Stipulated Facts with the Government 3. On July 7, 2008, I filed a petition to enforce the CVRA rights of Jane Doe No. I and Jane Doe No. 2 with regard to sex offenses committed against them by Jeffrey Epstein while they were minors. The course of the proceedings since then is well-known to the Court. For purposes of this affidavit regarding privileges, it is enough to briefly recount the efforts of the victims to reach a stipulated set of facts with the Government — efforts that the Government has blocked. 4. The Court first held a hearing on victims' petition on July 11, 2008. The Court discussed a need to "hav[e] a complete record, and this is going to be an issue that's going to go to the Eleventh Circuit, [so it] may be better to have a complete record as to what your position is and the government's is as to what actions were taken." Tr. at 25-26. The Court concluded the hearing with the following instructions: "So I'll let both of you confer about whether there is a need Sr any additional evidence to be presented." Tr. at 32. 1 EFTA00179699

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 2 of 64 5. The victims and the U.S. Attorney's Office then attempted to reach a stipulated set of facts underlying the case. The U.S. Attorney's Office offered a very abbreviated set of proposed facts, and the victims responded with a detailed set of proposed facts. Rather than respond to the victims' specific facts, however, the U.S. Attorney's Office suddenly reversed course. On July 29, 2008, it filed a Notice to Court Regarding Absence of Need for Evidentiary Hearing (DE 17). The U.S. Attorney's Office took the following position: "After consideration, the Government believes that an evidentiary hearing is not necessary" (DE 17 at 1). The Office asserted that the Court need only take judicial notice of the fact that no indictment had been filed against Epstein to resolve the case. 6. On August 1, 2008, the victims filed a response to the Government's "Notice," giving a proposed statement of facts surrounding the case. DE 19 at 5. The victims' response also requested that the Court direct the Government to confer with the victims regarding the undisputed facts of the case, and produce the non-prosecution agreement and other information about the case. Id. at 14. On August 14, 2008, the Court held a hearing on the case regarding the confidentiality of the non-prosecution agreement. The Court ultimately ordered production of the agreement to the victims. 7. After the U.S. Attorney's Office made the non-prosecution agreement available to the victims, the victims reviewed it and pursued further discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office. Ultimately, however, the U.S. Attorney's Office declined to reach a stipulated set of facts with the victims and declined to provide further information about the case. 8. With negotiations at an impasse, the victims attempted to learn the facts of the case in other ways. In approximately May 2009, counsel for the victims propounded discovery requests in both state and federal civil cases against Epstein, seeking to obtain correspondence between Epstein and prosecutors regarding his plea agreement — information that the U.S. Attorney's Office was unwilling to provide to the victims and information that was highly relevant both to the victims' civil suit and their CVRA enforcement action. Epstein refused to produce that information, and (as the Court is aware) extended litigation to obtain the materials followed. The Court rejected all of Epstein's objections to producing the materials. 9. On June 30, 2010, counsel for Epstein sent to counsel for the victims approximately 358 pages of e-mail correspondence between criminal defense counsel and the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding the plea agreement that had been negotiated between them. See DE48-Attachment 1/Exhibit A. These e-mails began to disclose for the first time the extreme steps that had been taken by the U.S. Attorney's Office to avoid prosecuting Epstein and to avoid having the victims in the case learn about the non-prosecution agreement that had been reached between Epstein and the Government. While the Court ordered that all of the correspondence be turned over to the victims, Epstein chose to disobey that order and instead only produced the correspondence authored by the Government and redacted all correspondence authored by him or his attorneys. 10. In mid-July 2010, Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 settled their civil lawsuits against Epstein. Then, armed with the new information, they turned to moving forward in the CVRA case. On September 13, 2010, the victims informed the Court that they were preparing new filings in the case. 11. On October 12, 2010, the Court entered an order directing the victims to provide a status report on the case by October 27, 2010. That same day, counsel for the victims again contacted 2 EFTA00179700

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225.1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 3 of 64 the U.S. Attorney's Office about the possibility of reaching a stipulated set of facts in the case. That same day, the U.S. Attorney's Office responded: "We don't have any problem with agreeing that a factual assertion is correct if we agree that is what occurred" (DE 41 at 2). 12. On October 23, 2010, the victims e-mailed to the U.S. Attorney's Office a detailed proposed statement of facts, with many of the facts now documented by the correspondence between the U.S. Attorney's Office and Epstein's counsel. The victims requested that the U.S. Attorney's Office identify which facts it would agree to. In a letter to the U.S. Attorney's Office, the victims stated: If you believe that any of the facts they propose are incorrect, Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 would reiterate their long-standing request that you work with us to arrive at a mutually-agreed statement of facts. As you know, in the summer of 2008 Jane Doe No. I and Jane Doe No. 2 were working with you on a stipulation of facts when you reversed course and took that position that no recitation of the facts was necessary (see doe. No. 19 at 2).. I hope that your e-mail means that you will at least look at our facts and propose any modifications that you deem appropriate. Having that evidence quickly available to the Court could well help move this case to a conclusion. That same day, the U.S. Attorney's Office agreed to forward the proposed statement of facts to the appropriate Assistant U.S. Attorney for review (DE 41 at 2-3). 13. On October 26, 2010, rather than stipulate to undisputed facts, the U.S. Attorney's Office contacted the victims' attorneys and asked them to delay the filing of their motion for a two- week period of time so that negotiations could be held between the Office and the victims in an attempt to narrow the range of disputes in the case and to hopefully reach a settlement resolution without the need for further litigation. Negotiations between the victims and the U.S. Attorney's Office then followed over the next two days. However, at 6:11 p.m. on October 27, 2010 — the date on which the victims' pleading was due — the U.S. Attorney's Office informed the victims that it did not believe that it had time to review the victims' proposed statement of facts and advise which were accurate and which were inaccurate. The Office further advised the victims that it believed that the victims did not have a right to confer with their Office under the CVRA in this case because in its view the case is "civil" litigation rather than "criminal" litigation (doe. No. 41 at 3). 14. As a result, purely as an accommodation to the U.S. Attorney's Office, on October 27, 2010, the victims filed a report with the Court in which they agreed to delay filing their motion and accompanying facts for up to two-weeks to see if negotiations can resolve (or narrow) the disputes with the U.S. Attorney's Office (DE 41 at 4). Discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office dragged on, including a personal meeting between Jane Doe No. 1 and the U.S. Attorney in December 2010. I In seeming contradiction to this position, on March 17, 2011, the U.S. Attorney's Office informed the victims that it would not be making any initial disclosures to the victims as required for civil cases by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(aX1). The U.S. Attorney's Office did not explain why they believe that this rule of civil procedure is inapplicable if they think this case is properly viewed as a "civil" case. 3 EFTA00179701

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 4 of 64 IS. After further discussions failed to produce any agreement or other visible progress, the victims informed the U.S. Attorney's Office that they would file their "summary judgment" motion with the Court on March 18, 2011 and requested further cooperation from the Office on the facts. 16. Ultimately, after months of discussion, the U.S. Attorney's Office informed counsel for the victims that — contrary to promises made earlier to stipulate to undisputed facts — no such stipulation would be forthcoming. Instead, on March 15, 2011, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Wifredo A. Ferrer, sent a letter to the victims declining to reach any agreement on the facts: Because, as a matter of law, the CVRA is inapplicable to this matter in which no federal criminal charges were ever filed, your requests for the government's agreement on a set of proposed stipulated facts is unnecessary and premature. That is, because whether the rights in I8 U.S.C. § 3771(a) attach prior to the filing of a charge in a federal court is a matter of statutory interpretation, resolution of that question is not dependent upon the existence of any certain set of facts, other than whether a charging document was ever filed against Jeffrey Epstein in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. And while this Office remains willing to cooperate, cooperation does not mean agreeing to facts that are not relevant to the resolution of the legal dispute at issue .... Letter from Wifredo A. Ferrer to Paul G. Cassell (March 15, 2011). 17. Accordingly, unable to work with the Government to reach a resolution of the facts, on March 21, 2011, the victims filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, alleging 53 undisputed facts along with some evidentiary support for each of the facts. DE 48. The victims also filed a motion to have their facts accepted because of the Government's failure to contest their facts. DE 49. The victims also filed a motion to have the Court direct the Government to not withhold relevant evidence. DE 50. 18. Following a hearing on the motions, on September 26, 2011, the Court rejected the Government's argument that the CVRA was inapplicable in this case because the Government had never filed charges against Epstein. DE 99. The Court, however, rejected the victims' argument that it should accept their facts because of the Government's failure to contest the facts. DE 99 at 11. Instead, the Court directed that discovery could proceed in the form of requests for admission and document production requests. Id. at 11. The Court reserved ruling on the victims' motion that the Government should be directed not to withhold evidence. 19. In light of the Court's order, on October 3, 2011, the victims filed requests for production with the Government. The requests included 25 specific requests, each of which linked very directly to the facts that the victims were attempting to prove in this case. 20. On November 7, 2011, the day when the Government's responses were due, rather than produce even a single page of discovery, the Government filed a motion to dismiss the victims' petitions. DE 119. On that same day, the Government filed a motion to stay discovery. DE 121. The victims filed a response, arguing that the Government's motion was a stall tactic. DE 129. The victims also filed a motion to compel production of all of their discovery requests. DE 130. The Government filed a reply, arguing that it was not stalling. Indeed, the Government told the Court that "the United States has agreed to provide some information to [the victims] even 4 EFTA00179702

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 5 of 64 during the pendency of the stay [of discovery] and is undertaking a search for that information." DE 140 at 4. Contrary to that representation, however, over the next seventeen months, the Government did not produce any information to the victims, despite the victims reminding the Government of that statement made to the court. 21. Ultimately, after some additional motions and rulings, on June 19, 2013, the Court denied the Government's motion to dismiss and lifted any stay of discovery. DE 189. That same day, the Court entered an order granting the victims' motion to compel and directing the Government to produce (1) all correspondence between it and Epstein; (2) all communications between the Government and outside entities; and (3) every other document requested by the victims. DE 190 at 2. With respect to the third item, the Court allowed the Government to assert privilege by producing the items in question for in camera inspection and filing a contemporaneous privilege log. Id. The Court required that the privilege log must "clearly identify[] each document[] by author(s), addressee(s), recipient(s), date, and general subject matter DE 190 at 2. 22. On July 19 and July 27, 2013, the Government made its production. With regard to item (1) — correspondence with Epstein, the Government withheld the correspondence pending a ruling from the Eleventh Circuit on Epstein's motion to stay production of these materials. With regard to the other items, the Government produced 14,825 pages of documents to the Court for in camera inspection, but turned over only 1,357 pages to the victims. Thus, the Government asserted privilege to more than 90% of the documents in question. The documents that the Government produced were almost worthless to the victims, as they included such things that the victims' own letters to the Government (Bates 0001-04), court pleadings filed by the victims themselves or other victims, by Epstein, or by news media organizations (e.g., Bates 00142-88, 00229-31, 281-311, 00668-69), public court rulings on Epstein related matters (e.g , Bates 0008- 10, 0012-14. 0036-86, 00190-228), public newspaper articles (e.g., Bates 0011, 0030, 0032-33), and similar materials already available to the victims. It also included roughly four hundred pages of notices sent to the various other victims in this case — notices that were substantively indistinguishable from the notices the victims themselves in this case had already received. Almost without exception, the documents the Government produced do not go to the disputed issues in this case. 23. The Government made one last production of materials in this case on August 6, 2013. This involved roughly 1,500 pages of documents that were largely meaningless in the context of the contested issues in the case. They included public documents in the case such the crime victims' own pleadings, see, e.g., Bates 000671-000711 (copy of the victims' redacted summary judgment motion). Curiously, while the Government has produced these documents that would likely fall into an "irrelevant" category of documents, they have simultaneously refused production of hundreds of other documents that are responsive to our requests on the basis of relevance. 24. The victims have tried to obtain information on all relevant subjects through requests for admission. The Government, however, has refused to admit many of the victims' central allegations in this case. A copy of the victims' requests for admissions and the Government's responses is attached to this affidavit so that the Court can see that the victims have diligently tried to pursue this avenue for developing the facts in this case. 5 EFTA00179703

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 6 of 64 25. The victims have also tried to obtain information on subjects related to their suit by voluntary requests for interview with persons who are no longer employed by the Justice Department. For example, I have sent letters to both Bruce Reinhart and Alex Acosta, who both have information about the Epstein case, requesting an opportunity to discuss the case with them. Both of them have ignored my letters. The Need for the Materials Requested by the Victims 26. The documents that the victims requested that the Government produce to them on October 3, 2011, are all highly relevant to their CVRA enforcement action. We would not have requested them otherwise. The victims also have no other means of obtaining the requested material. This section of the affidavit explains why the materials are needed by the victims. For the convenience of the Court, the affidavit will proceed on a section-by-section basis concerning the need for the materials. Also for the convenience of the Court, a copy of the October 3, 2011, request for production is attached to this Affidavit. Also attached is the victims' supplemental discovery request of June 24, 2013. As the Court will note from reviewing the requests for production, most of the requests specifically recount the allegations that the requested documents would support, in an effort to eliminate any dispute from the Government that the documents were not relevant to the case. Many of the requests for production link directly to specific paragraphs in the victims' previously-filed summary judgment motion. Accordingly, the victims have a very specific need for these documents to support the allegations in the summary judgment motion found at DE 48 at 3-23. 27. The Court has previously concluded that the victims' proof of their claims is, at this point in the case, inadequate. Instead, the Court has ruled: "Whether the evidentiary proofs will entitle [the victims] to that relief [of setting aside the non-prosecution agreement] is a question properly reserved for determination upon a fully developed evidentiary record." DE 189 at 11-12. The Court has further indicated that it will be considering an "estoppel" argument raised by the Government as a defense in this case. DE 189 at 12 n.6. The Court has noted that this argument "implicates a fact-sensitive equitable defense which must be considered in the historical factual context of the entire interface between Epstein, the relevant prosecutorial authorities and the federal offense victims — including an assessment of the allegation of a deliberate conspiracy between Epstein and federal prosecutors to keep the victims in the dark on the pendency of negotiations between Epstein and federal authorities until well after the fact and presentation of the non-prosecution agreement to them as a fait aceompli." DE 189 at 12 n.6 (emphasis added). The victims have a compelling need for information about the Government's actions to show what the "entire interface" was and to respond to the Government's estoppel arguments, as well as other defenses that it appears to be preparing to raise. See, e.g., DE 62 (52-page response from the Government to the victim's summary judgment motion, raising numerous factually- based and other arguments against the victim's position). 28. Request for Production ("RFP") No. 1 requests information regarding the Epstein investigation. These documents arc needed to support the victims' allegations that the Government had a viable criminal case for many federal sex offenses that it could have pursued against Epstein. See, e.g., DE 48 at 3-7. 29. RIP No. 2 requests information regarding crime victim notifications in this case. These documents are needed to support the victims' allegations that their rights under the CVRA, their 6 EFTA00179704

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 7 of 64 right to notice and to confer with the Government, were violated in this case. In particular, these documents are needed to demonstrate that the victims were not properly notified about the non- prosecution agreement (NPA) entered into by the Government and Jeffrey Epstein and that the Government did not confer with the victims about the agreement. See, e.g., DE 48 at 11-17. 30. RFP No. 3 requests information about the NPA, including in particular its confidentiality provision. These documents are needed to demonstrate that the confidentiality provision precluded disclosing the agreement to Jane Doe No. I and Jane Doe No. 2, as well as to other victims. See, e.g., DE 48 at 10-17. These documents are further needed to demonstrate that Jeffrey Epstein specifically orchestrated the secrecy of the agreement, thereby deliberately causing the Government's CVRA violation in this case. See, e.g., DE 48 at 13. 31. RFP No. 4 requests documents relating to negotiations between the Government and Jeffrey Epstein concerning the court and/or location in which Jeffrey Epstein would enter any guilty plea (including in particular any negotiations concerning concluding the plea in Miami or another location outside of West Palm Beach). These documents are relevant to the victims allegations that the Government was interested in finding a place to conclude any plea agreement that would effectively keep Epstein's victims (most of whom resided in or about West Palm Beach) from learning what was happening through the press See, e.g., DE 48 at 7-8. 32. RIP No. 5 requests documents pertaining to negotiations between the Government and Jeffrey Epstein regarding any legal representation of the victims in civil cases against Epstein. These documents are needed to prove the victims' allegation that part of the plea negotiations with Epstein involved Epstein's efforts to make sure that the victims would be represented in civil cases against Epstein by someone who was not an experienced personal injury lawyer or by someone familiar to Epstein or his legal team. See, e.g., DE 48 at 9. 33. RFP No. 6 requests documents concerning the Government's and/or Epstein awareness or discussion of possible public criticism and/or victim objections to the non-prosecution agreement that they negotiated. The documents are needed to prove the victims' allegations that the Government wanted the non-prosecution agreement with Epstein concealed from public view because of the intense public criticism that would have resulted had the agreement been disclosed and/or the possibility that victims would have objected in court and convinced the judge not to accept the agreement. See, e.g., DE 48 at 7-8, 11. They are also relevant to bias and motive by the authors or subjects of other documents in this case. 34. RFP No. 7 requests documents regarding the Government's awareness of its potential CVRA obligations in this case and regarding any discussions between the Government and Epstein concerning these CVRA obligations in this case. These documents are needed to prove the victims' allegations that the Government was aware that it potentially had obligations under the CVRA to notify the victims about the non-prosecution agreement and any related state court plea agreement. See, e.g., DE 48 at 12-13. 35. RFP No. 8 requests documents regarding Epstein's lobbying efforts to persuade the Government to give him a more favorable plea arrangement and/or non-prosecution agreement, including efforts on his behalf by former President Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, and Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz. These materials are needed to prove the victims allegation that, after Epstein signed the non-prosecution agreement, his performance was delayed while he used his significant social and political connections to lobby the Justice Department to obtain a 7 EFTA00179705

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 8 of 64 more favorable plea deal. See, e.g., DE 48 at 16-18. These materials also are needed to establish the course of the proceedings in this case, which is necessary in light of the Government's letters to the victims (discussed in the next paragraph) concerning the status of the case. 36. RFP No. 9 requests documents regarding the letters sent to the victims by the FBI on January 10, 2008, Jane Doe No. I and Jane Doe No. 2 advising them that "this case is currently under investigation." These documents are needed to show that these letters were inaccurate or, at the very least, highly misleading, because they conveyed the impression that no plea arrangement (for example, a non-prosecution agreement) had been negotiated between Epstein and the Government. See, e.g., DE 48 at 16. These documents are also needed to respond to the Government's "estoppel" defense, as noted in the Court's order DE 189 at 12 n.6. 37. RFP No. 10 requests documents regarding the victims' allegations that the FBI was led to believe that their investigation of Epstein was going to produce a federal criminal prosecution and that the FBI was also misled by the U.S. Attorney's office about the status of the case. The Government has argued that these documents are not relevant to the case, because the only issue is whether the Government misled the victims. But the Government fails to recognize that the victims received information about the case through the FBI. These documents are therefore needed to demonstrate that the victims received inaccurate information about the status of the case — inaccurate information caused by the U.S. Attorney's Office's negotiations with Epstein. If the FI31 agents were not accurately informed about the progress of the cases, then they could not have accurately informed the victims about the progress of the case — a central point in the victims' argument. Moreover, these documents would show a common scheme or plan — something made admissible in a trial by operation of Fed. R. Evid. 404(b). Of course, if the U.S. Attorney's Office was misleading the FBI about the NM, it would have been part of the same scheme or plan to mislead the victims as well. The documents are also needed to support specific allegations in the victims' summary judgment motion. See, e.g., DE 48 at 16-17. 38. RFP No. 11 requests documents regarding various meetings that the Government (including FBI agents) had with the victims. These documents are needed to prove that during those meetings the Government did not disclose to the victims (or to their attorneys) that a non- prosecution agreement had been negotiated with Epstein, and even signed with Epstein, that related to their cases, allegations that the victims have advanced in their summary judgment motion. See, e.g., DE 48 at 16-18. 39. RFP No. 12 requests all documents connected with a request from the U.S. Attorney's Office to me (Bradley J. Edwards) to write a letter concerning the need for filing federal charges against Epstein and follow-up to that letter. These documents are needed to show that this request was made to me without disclosing the existence of the non-prosecution agreement. Thus, just as Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 were deceived about the NM, I was deceived as well. See, e.g., DE 48 at 18-19. It is also needed to contradict the Government's apparent position that it disclosed the "existence' of the NPA to me and to the victims. See, e..g., Gov't Answers to RFA ¶ 13(d) ("The government admits that, when Epstein was pleading guilty to the state charges discussed in the non-prosecution agreement, the USAO and Epstein's defense attorneys sought to keep the document memorializing the non-prosecution agreement confidential, but denies that they sought at that time to keep the existence of the non-prosecution agreement confidential."). 8 EFTA00179706

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 9 of 64 40. RFP No. 13 requests documents regarding how, on or about June 27, 2008, the Government learned that Epstein would be entering his plea to state charges on or about June 30, 2008. The documents are needed to describe the course of proceedings in this case and to prove both the Government's and Epstein's awareness that he would be entering a guilty plea (and thus blocking prosecution of other crimes) without the victims' full knowledge of what was happening. See, e.g., DE 48 at 19-20. 41. RFP No. 14 requests documents relating to the Government and Epstein working together to kecp the existence of the non-prosecution agreement secret, including declining comment about the existence of such an agreement when asked about it when his guilty plea in state court became public knowledge. These documents are needed to prove the victims' allegations that the Government concealed the NPA from them, see, e.g., DE 48 at 14-18,and to contradict what appears to be the Government's position, namely that the victims were aware of the NPA shortly after it was negotiated, see, e.g., Gov't Answers to RFA ¶ 13(b) (claiming that "the USAO had communicated with Jane Doe #1 about the non-prosecution agreement prior to Epstein's June 30, 2008 guilty plea."). These documents are also necessary to contradict the Government's apparent claim that the NPA did not bar discussions with crime victims. See, e.g., Gov't Answers to RFA ¶ 13(d) (Government denying request that it admit that "Epstein's defense attorneys had negotiated for a confidentiality provision in the non-prosecution agreement that barred conferring with victims about the agreement"). 42. RFP No. 15 requests documents pertaining to the feasibility of notifying the victims about the NPA, along with information concerning how the victims came to receive a "corrected" notification letter on about September 3, 2008 — months after Epstein had pled guilty. These documents are needed to demonstrate that the Government had no valid reason for failing to provide notice to the victims. It is also needed to demonstrate why the victims at first received inaccurate information about the NPA, as well as Jeffrey Epstein's involvement in that inaccurate notice. See, e.g., DE 48 at 15-16. 43. RFP No. 16 requests documents regarding Bruce Reinhart, a senior prosecutor who was present in the U.S. Attorney's Office during the time that the Office negotiated the NPA with Epstein, blocking his prosecution for federal crimes in the Southern Districdt of Florida. In RFP No. 16, the victims have sought documents showing that Reinhart learned confidential, non- public information about Epstein matter. The Court will recall that Reinhart has filed a sworn affidavit with this Court, in which he flatly declared that while he was a prosecutor in the Office: "I never learned any confidential, non-public information about the Epstein matter." DE 79-1 at 3 (¶ 12). When Reinhart made that statement, it seemed improbable to me, because Reinhart was in close contact with other prosecutors in the Office and would seem likely that he would have discussed the high-profile Epstein case with them. Additionally, I learned through public record that while still a prosecutor at the Office Mr. Reinhart established his criminal defense office at the exact address (and exact Suite number) as Jeffrey Epstein's personal business address. However, I did not have any direct way of contradicting Reinhart's sworn statement. Since then, however, in answering the victims' Requests for Admissions, the Government has admitted that it possesses information that Reinhart learned confidential, non-public information about the Epstein case and that he discussed the Epstein case with other prosecutors. Gov't Answers to RFA's ¶ 15(a) & (b). Of course, this means that the Government has documents that Reinhart 9 EFTA00179707

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 10 of 64 filed a false affidavit with this Court. This gives rise to the reasonable inference that, if Reinhart was willing to provide false information about this subject, he may have additional information about the case that is being concealed as well. 44. Materials about Reinhart are also needed to support the victims' summary judgment motion. See, e.g., DE 48 at 22-23 (raising allegations about Reinhart). 45. Reinhart's affidavit with the Court also states: "Because I did not have any, I did not share non-public confidential information about the Epstein investigation with any of Epstein's attorneys." DE 79-1 at 4 (1 17). Because the Government has information demonstrating that the first part of this statement is false, it may well be that the second part of the statement is false as well. Given that Mr. Reinhart established a business address identical to Epstein's business address, at a time while he was still working at the US Attorney's Office, and that Mr. Reinhart ultimately represented several of Epstein's co-conspirators, jet pilots, and staff, during the civil litigation, any involvement Mr. Reinhart had with the Epstein case while working at the Office is highly relevant. 46. The Government has further admitted that it possesses documents reflecting contacts between Bruce Reinhart and persons/entities affiliated with Jeffrey Epstein before Reinhart left his job at the U.S. Attorney's Office. Gov't Answers to RFA's 1 16. As stated above, Reinhart left the U.S. Attorney's Office to start a private firm that was located in the same address as Epstein's personal business where he was daily. This would appear to be a violation of the Florida rules of ethics for attorneys. 47. Information about Reinhart's connections to Epstein is critical to the victims' allegations in this case. If Reinhart was helping Epstein gain insight into the prosecutions efforts, that would provide a motive for Reinhart (and other prosecutors) not to properly notify the victims and not to confer with them. Also, if Epstein was improperly receiving information about the prosecution efforts against him (or lack thereof), that could be highly relevant to the remedies stage of this case, in which the victims will ask (among other things) to have the NPA agreement invalidated. Epstein has already indicated that he will raise a double jeopardy argument against that effort. However, double jeopardy considerations do not apply in situations where the defendant was not truly in jeopardy of prosecution. In addition, the Court may wish to consider, in crafting a remedy, Epstein's culpability for the violations of the NPA. Evidence that Epstein was improperly obtaining information about the prosecution efforts against him would be highly relevant to that culpability assessment. It is also relevant to the estoppel defense that the Government (and perhaps Epstein as well) intend to raise. 48. Evidence concerning Reinhart's connections, including improper connections, to Epstein is also relevant to bias and motive in this case. It would show, for example, the Reinhart had a reason to encourage others in the U.S. Attorney's Office to give Epstein a more lenient deal than the one he was entitled to. 49. RFP No. 16 requested information not only about improper connections between Epstein and Reinhart, but more broadly about such connections with any other prosecutors. Of course, if the Government possesses such information, it would be highly relevant to the victims' allegations for the reasons just discussed. In its answers to the victims' Requests for Admission, the Government admits that it has information about a personal or business relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and another prosecutor involved in the Epstein case, Matthew Menchel. Answers 10 EFTA00179708

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 11 of 64 to Requests for Admission at 1 20. The Government should be required to disclose all of those documents so that the victims can determine whether there was anything improper about those relationships. In my experience, it is highly unusual for federal prosecutors to work on a case prosecuting someone (such as Jeffrey Epstein) and then, shortly thereafter, leave the employment of the federal government and enter into a business relationship with the person who was being prosecuted. 50. RFP No. 17 asks for documents concerning an investigation into the Epstein prosecution undertaken by the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) in Washington, D.C. The investigation was undertaken at the request of the victims, who asked the Justice Department to determine whether "improper influences" were brought to bear during the negotiations involving the possible prosecution (and ultimately the non-prosecution) of Jeffrey Epstein. It is apparent from the privilege logs that the Government has produced that OPR generated a great deal of correspondence (at least 46 pages) regarding this request. See Bates P- 013909 to P-013955. Of course, improper influences being brought to bear on the Epstein prosecution would support the victims' allegations that they were not being properly notified. Moreover, OPR may well have investigated the specific allegations that are at issue in this case — or directed others to undertake such an investigation. Here again, this information would be critical to supporting the victims' case. In fact, because OPR has presumably investigated many of the precise actions and actors, about which the victims complain in this litigation, and have already gathered many of the documents needed, the production of the OPR case file could probably short-cut this litigation and discovery process. 51. There is no other way to obtain this information from OPR. On May 6, 2011, nearly half a year after the victims' request of December 10, 2010, for an investigation, OPR sent a letter to my co-counsel, Professor Paul Cassell, in which it stated that it "regret[ted) it could not be of assistance" in providing information about the allegations. 52. RFP No. 18 asks for information about why the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida was "conflicted out" of handling various issues related to the Epstein case. This information is needed to show why the victims did not receive proper notifications about the NPA that the Office negotiated with Epstein. It appears that the conflict of interest that has been recognized may have to do with the Office's treatment of the victims. Moreover, in its production of documents, and in follow-up correspondence, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida has indicated that there are no responsive documents being held by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the other district that is handling conflict matters. (It appears that this other office is the Middle District of Florida.) This appears to be improbable, because the conflict matters would presumably generate many documents covered by the victims' discovery requests, including the OPR investigative file. Accordingly, the conflict matter is highly relevant to determining whether the U.S. Attorney's Office has provided complete production to the victims. A conflict of interest would also be highly relevant to the motivations of the Government attorneys throughout the handling of the Epstein case. 53. RFP No. 19 asks for information supporting allegations made in March 2011, by former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta. He sent a three-page letter to the news media in which he claimed that when Government attorneys began investigating Epstein, Epstein launched "a yearlong assault on the prosecution and the prosecutors." This information is needed to explain 11 EFTA00179709

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 12 of 64 why the U.S. Attorney's Office would have withheld notifications from the victims about the NPA. If the prosecutors were being assaulted, as Acosta has said they were, then they would have reason to disregard their obligations to crime victims. In addition, this would show improper behavior by Epstein, which would be relevant at the remedies stage of this case in determining the scope of any remedy. These allegations would also bear strongly on motive and bias. 54. RFP No. 20 requests documents between the Government and state and local prosecutors and police agencies (including The Palm Beach Police Department) regarding the non- prosecution agreement. Because this involves information outside of the Department, it is the victims understanding that the Government has already turned over all of this information to them, as the Court has directed. See DE 190 at 2 (requiring production of information with persons or entities outside the federal government). For the sake of completeness, however, it is worth noting that this information is needed to demonstrate that the victims were not properly informed that Epstein's plea to state charges would trigger the NPA and preclude prosecution for crimes committed against them. 55. RFP No. 21 requests correspondence regarding the NPA. Here again, the victims understand that the Government is prepared to produce all of this information to them (once the stay pending action by the Eleventh Circuit is lifted). Again, for the sake of completeness, it is worth noting that this correspondence is needed to demonstrate the victims' claims that the Government was concealing the existence of the NPA from them and that this was done at Epstein's behest. The Court has specifically noted that the victims have a need for information that will allow them to argue to the Court in support of their "allegation of a deliberate conspiracy between Epstein and federal prosecutors to keep the victims in the dark on the pendency of negotiations between Epstein and federal authorities until well after the fact and presentation of the non-prosecution agreement to them as a/aft accompli." DE 189 at 12 n.6. 56. RFP No. 22 requests information about any considerations that Epstein provided, or offered to provide, to any individual within the Government. Here again, the victims understand that this information is being provided to them. It is again worth noting, however, that this information is highly relevant to explaining why the U.S. Attorney's Office would not have properly notified the victims about what was happening in their case, an allegation that is at the center of the victims' summary judgment motion. See, e.g., DE 48 at 11 (noting allegation that Epstein pushed the U.S. Attorney's Office to keep the NPA secret from public view to avoid public criticism). 57. RFP No. 23 asks for documents that will assist Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2 in protecting their rights under the CVRA. This request links to the Government's obligations under the CVRA to use its "best efforts" to protect victims' rights. 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1). The direct connection between this request and the victims' case is self-explanatory. 58. RFP No. 24 request correspondence related to the Epstein prosecution that the Government had with entities outside the federal government. Here again, it is my understanding that these materials have already been ordered produced. See DE 190 at 2 (requiring production of information with persons or entities outside the federal government). For the sake of completeness, this information is again relevant to showing the course of the Epstein 12 EFTA00179710

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 13 of 64 investigation and why the victims were not properly notified about event during that investigation. 59. RFP No. 25 requests all initial productions that are required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This is a protective request to ensure that, should it be determined that the Civil Rules apply, they then receive all materials to which they are entitled. 60. In June 2013, the victims sent a supplemental request for production, asking the Government to provide any information concerning any investigation that the Department undertook concerning the treatment of the victims during the investigation in this case, including any FBI, grand jury, OPR or other investigation in the Southern District of Florida, Middle District of Florida, or elsewhere. Here again, this information is critically needed, as it would go directly to proving the victims' allegations that their rights were violated during the investigation of Epstein. This information would also go directly to defeating the Government's "estoppel" argument. This information would also show motive and bias. Inadeouate Privilege Log 61. The Government has produced a privilege log that violates the Court's order in this case. I have been greatly hampered in responding to the Government's assertions of privilege because of that inadequate log. Indeed, in many cases, it is impossible to determine whether the Government's assertions of privilege are even plausible because of the inadequacy of the log. 62. The Court has directed the Government to produce a privilege log that "clearly identifies] each document[] [as to which privilege is asserted] by author(s), addressee(s), recipient(s), date, and general subject matter . . . ." DE 190 at 2. Many of the entries in the privilege log fail to meet this requirement. 63. A good illustration of the inadequacies of the privilege log comes from the very first entry in the log, covering Box No. I (P-000001 through P-000039), some 39 pages of documents. DE 212-1. Yet the only description of these 39 pages is: "File folder entitled 'CORR RE GJ SUBPOENAS' containing correspondence related to various grand jury subpoenas and attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes." 64. Another good illustration of the inadequacies of the privilege log is provided on page 20 of the first privilege log, with regard to Box No. 3 (P-012362 through P-012451). The Government asserts privilege here regarding 90 pages of documents. Yet the only description of these 90 pages is: "File folder entitled 'Key Documents' containing correspondence between AUSA and case agent regarding indictment prep questions, victim identification information, corrections to draft indictment, indictment preparation timeline, key grand jury materials." 65. There are many other illustrations of the inadequacies of the privilege log which the Court will see when it examines it. I have also filed contemporaneously a response to the government's privilege log, which identifies many situations of an inadequate privilege log, as well as other responses that are needed to respond to the Government's privilege log. 66. The Government has never contacted me or co-counsel about any burdens associated with producing a privilege log that complied with the Court's directives. At all times relevant to this case, I would have been willing to work with Government counsel to minimize any excessive burden from producing an adequate privilege log. The requests for production that I sent to the Government specifically invited discussion to avoid any excessive burden. Failure to Prove Factual Underpinnings of Privilege Claim 13 EFTA00179711

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 225-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/16/2013 Page 14 of 64 67. Many of the Government's privilege assertions require factual premises — such as the existence of an attorney-client relationship and the rendition of legal services within that relationship. Yet the Government has not provided the factual underpinnings for any of its privilege assertions. 68. An illustration of this problem is found on page I of the supplemental privilege log (DE 216-1), with regard to supplemental box No. 3 (P-013284). The entry here reads: "7/10/08 emails between J. Sloman and A. Marie Villafafla, K. Atkinson, and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger's letter re victim notification." The log then indicates that the Government is asserting attorney-client privilege, work product privilege, and deliberative process privilege. The Government, however, does not provide any document for any of the factual underpinnings of any of these claims. For example, with regard to the attorney-client claim, the Government does not explain who the attorney is and who the client is. With regard to the work product claim, the Government does not explain what litigation this document contemplated. And with regard to deliberative process, the Government does not explain what deliberative process was involved. 69. There are many other illustrations of the Government's failure to prove the factual underpinnings of privilege assertions, which the Court will see when it examines the privilege log and the victims responsive log. Waiver of Confidentiality 70. Some of the privileges that the Government has asserted have been waived. Of course, a requirement of a privilege is that confidentiality be maintained. Some of the materials have been circulated outside of any confidential circle, thereby waiving privilege. 71. An illustration of waiver found on page 1 of the supplemental privilege log (DE 216-1), with regard to supplemental box No. 3 (P413282 to 83). The entry here reads: "7/08/08 email from A. Marie Villafafla to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, Ki. Atkinson, and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger's letter re victim notification." The log then indicates that the Government is asserting attorney-client privilege regarding these emails. But the emails were not internal to the U.S. Attorney's Office, but were also sent to the "FBI." (This is another illustration of the inadequacies of the privilege log, because who in the FBI the materials were sent to is not disclosed.) But the FBI is a law enforcement investigative agency, not an agency that provides legal advice. Accordingly, any attorney-client privilege would be waived by dissemination of this e-mail outside the U.S. Attorney's Office. 72. Another illustration of waiver is found on page 3 of the supplemental privilege log (DE 216- 1), with regard to supplemental box No. 3 (P-013504 to P-013507). The entry here reads: "File folder labeled `Mtg w/ Ken Starr, MA, JS, Drew' containing handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafafla." Kenn Starr, of course, is a defense attorney who represented defendant Epstein. Recording information provided by a defense attorney is not part of any governmental attorney- client privilege. 73. Another illustration of waiver is found on page 7 of the supplemental privilege log (DE 216-1), with regard to supplemental box No. 3 (P413644 through P-013653). The entry here reads: "File folder entitled "Notes Re Plea Negotiations" containing 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Marie Villafafla to J. Richards, N. Kuyrkendall re status update; undated and typed handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafafia re items to be completed on case, strength of case, victim interviews, 14 EFTA00179712