📄 Extracted Text (589 words)
From:
Subject: FW: Epstein and SDNY in 2016
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2020 15:14:30 +0000
Stephen Brown at the Daily News is working on a story for next Tuesday about Epstein, Maxwell, and pitches made by
victims' lawyers to in 2016 that "went nowhere." His email below explains further. His actual questions
are at the end of his email. He has no expectations about guidance, but would appreciate any. Don't know if we should
be forwarding this to presumably Stephen could contact her on his own.
From: Brown, Stephen <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2020 4:40 PM
To: Margolin,
Subject: Epstein and SDNY in 2016
H= Here's a rundown of the story I'm working on. Am seeking guidance from SDNY on the office's thinking at the time,
if FBI was looped in, and who the decision-maker was on this. Apologies for the long email but I figure better to provide as
much detail as possible. My editors are pretty interested in this one.
On Feb. 29, 2016, Epstein victims' attorneys Stan Pottinger, Brad Edwards and Peter Skinner met with then-AUSA
and pitched her on an investigation of the Epstein scheme. I'm told Kramer had questions about establishing
venue, the South Florida NPA, statute of limitations issues and the general Dal tradition of not second-guessing another
US Attorney. She wondered if the attorneys were proposing an investigation of new conduct, or rather a re-do of the
South Florida case. (This is all from sources familiar).
According to Edwards's book, the team of attorneys left the meeting feeling hopeful.
The AUSA acted confident that a case would be brought against Epstein for crimes committed against Virginia and
others in New York. Of course, first
she had to have facts, witnesses, evidence, and victims of a New York crime.
We assured the prosecutor that the number of victims in New York far exceeded
those discovered in Florida. The group walked out excited that New
York was finally going to bring a case against Epstein. I said to David and
Pete, "Don't hold your breath, the Southern District obviously doesn't know
who they're dealing with yet:"
The effort went nowhere, as far as the victims' attorneys know. Then, after attorneys David Boies and Sigrid McCawley
took Maxwell's depositions in the case, Boies re-approached SDNY, I'm told. The meeting took place in August or
September between Boies, Pottinger and Kramer. They pitched SDNY on charging Maxwell with perjury. They also
believed Epstein, who was paying Maxwell's legal bills, was in a perjury conspiracy. They saw this as a work-around to
Kramer's concerns about the NPA etc.
But that also went nowhere. Obviously everything changed after the Miami Herald articles and SDNY opened an
investigation under Berman.
In addition to the headline that SDNY initially passed on tackling the case, this story will also note how the contact
between victims' attorneys and SDNY relates to the perjury counts in Maxwell's criminal case. She's said in filings she was
EFTA00098813
the victim of a "perjury trap," presumably set by Boies in cahoots with SONY. (From her perspective).
Questions:
Why didn't SDNY pursue the Epstein case in 2016?
Why didn't it pursue perjury counts?
Did SDNY contact the FBI or South Florida prosecutors about Epstein during that period?
Who was the decision maker after Kramer met with the victims' attorneys?
Did Preet make the call?
This story is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, so this is not super urgent. Hope to hear from you tomorrow.
Thanks,
Stephen Rex Brown
Manhattan Federal Court reporter
NY DAILY NEWS
917-589-9831
EFTA00098814
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
e4856e813fa8b5f037dbac9b4c9bd629356dae7f458b73dca147238118da193e
Bates Number
EFTA00098813
Dataset
DataSet-9
Document Type
document
Pages
2
Comments 0