EFTA00028149.pdf

From: Martin Weinberg -4 To:" "I Subject: Re: Epstein - Legal Issues and Requests Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 11:41:15 +0000 maybe we can find a few minutes after today's hearing to discuss further Thanks Marty Sent from my iPhone On Jul 17, 2019, at 10:56 PM, Marty, ) wrote: I stand corrected regarding the timing of the recusal of SDFL from potential prosecution; I hadn't realized that (which may further show that any speculation about the genesis of our investigation being with SDFL is misguided). In any event, as we have represented to the Court, our investigation was initiated internally, and beyond that we're not prepared to make representations about internal communications or to otherwise characterize the investigation. With respect to the preservation of communications, my understanding is that the Department generally retains communications for some period of years, so while we don't believe there is any formal obligation to retain (or produce) such materials, I don't believe there would be any issue with retrieving communications should that be necessary. Regarding the privilege review, I expect that we will utilize a wall / taint individual or team to screen for privileged materials, as we do in the ordinary course where there are privilege concerns. If in addition to attorney names and law firms there are search terms, phrases, etc., that you want to identify for the review team, you should certainly feel free to do so and we can facilitate that. In the first instance I expect it will take some time to process the drives and devices to make their content reviewable on a web-based platform, so I don't believe anyone is yet reviewing those items (with the possible exception of a required preliminary screen of images for possible child pornography). In terms of the attorney and firm names, my thought was that it would be helpful for the case team to have them in case somehow some material wasn't screened, for easy recognition should we come across those names—and I've had those types of identifying information in other cases—but that certainly isn't a requirement if you prefer otherwise. Once the materials are in a position to be reviewed by a taint team, we will let you know right away to facilitate the easiest and most straightforward process for screening, review, and eventual production. The lag in setting that up is not to interpose any delay, but rather because there are intermediate technological steps before a review team will have access to those materials. I hope that's helpful, and keeps the gears turning, and please let us know if additional information would be useful. thanks, Mi• From: Martin G. Weinberg <ME> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 18:46 To: < ; 'Marc Fernich' ‹ > Cc: 'Marty Weinberg' • < >; 'Martin Weinberg' <a> Subject: Epstein - Legal Issues and Requests EFTA00028149 Hi the SD Fla was ordered recused by the DOJ from criminal matters concerning Mr Epstein at a much earlier date, see Dkt 205-2 of the CVRA, at pg 12, fn 13 which was filed in our case as Doc 6- Exh 2 ( our bail submission of last week). You are correct that the ND Ga did not enter the CVRA proceedings until much later. I will await further communication on the communications-related request. I think its more consistent with a taint review - if that is indeed the search protocol that you will use or (if there is a challenge) attempt to use to review the seized Epstein phones/electroncs - for the attorney list to go to the taint prosecutor to guard against any risk that identifying an attorney may in combination with other evidence in your possession disclose a privilege. If there is a particular concern with the case team accessing privileged materials absent the list of attorneys, please let me know so we can address it without delay. We have enough legal issues... Thanks Best, Marty Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. This Electronic Message contains information from the Law Office of Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, please note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. From: ) ri[ay, Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 11:42 AM To: Martin G. Weinberg a; 'Marc Fernich' Cc: 'Marty Weinberg' Subject: RE: Epstein Arrest Seizure Items Hi Marty, C In reverse order, we're not prepared to make any generalized representations regarding any communications within the Department in its entirety, but I note for your reference that the Southern District of Florida apparently recused itself in or about March 2019, and it was only at that point, to my knowledge, that the Northern District of Georgia became involved in the CVRA case. As we have noted, our investigation had been active for several months at that time. And we will further discuss your other communications-related questions and get back to you. Regarding the review of electronic devices, we'll discuss internally whether we're in a position to specifically describe our review and screening process, but certainly it would be helpful in the first instance for you to provide the list of attorneys and/or firms that could implicate privilege. You can simply send that list to us—unless you have concerns that even the identities of those attorneys and firms would disclose privileged information, though I think ideally the case team would benefit from having that information as further protection against any taint. thanks, From: Martin G. Weinberg Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 08:31 To: Weinberg' Cc: 'Marty Weinberg' >; 'Marc Fernich' >; 'Martin EFTA00028150 Subject: RE: Epstein Arrest Seizure Items Good morning The purpose of this email is to address two issues separate from the ongoing bail/detention hearings. First, the seizure of various phones and computer-type devices from Mr Epstein and his residence. I would like to discuss the protocol for any search of the devices with the purpose of protecting the confidentiality of a vast amount of attorney-client and work product privileged communications that are within these devices. Can we schedule a call? I have assembled a preliminary list of attorneys. If the matter has been delegated to a taint prosecutor, and without waiving rights to contest the process, I would like to send the list of attorneys to that taint prosecutor. Second, yesterday MI stated that there had been no communications with the SD Fla. That is not surprising since they are recused. Would you inform the defense whether there has been a similar absence of any contact with the ND Ga prosecutors (in particular Ms and/or Mr ) or with Main Justice (eg CEOS or others)? I would also want to explore with you an agreement on preserving emails, texts, voicemessages, documents that would be relevant to the genesis of the SDNY investigation given the issues that we have raised regarding the NPA. I am not by this email seeking their discovery (a future issue), only an agreement on their preservation. Thanks Marty Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. This Electronic Message contains information from the Law Office of Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, please note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. From: Sent: Monday, July 15, 2019 8:35 PM To: Marc Fernich < Cc: Marty Weinberg ) [mailto: Subject: RE: Epstein Arrest Seizure Items Marc, ; Martin Weinberg cz >; Circling back on this, I'll ask the agents to bring the cash and other personal effects seized from Mr. Epstein to the hearing on Thursday, unless it is important to receive them before then, in which case please let me know and I'll try to arrange that. With respect to the electronic devices, we've obtained a warrant to search them