Subject: FW: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies]¶
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 23:01:57 +0000¶
See below. Would you please make sure that the drives that were made available for Maxwell’s counsel to review in the spring are preserved? If you could please send me an email confirming their preservation and where they will be stored, that would be great.¶
Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies]¶
Thank you for the follow up. Given that the FBI’s records do not match mine, I would ask that you please preserve the two disks that I reviewed in New York in the event they are necessary for future litigation or production at trial.¶
Best,¶
Laura¶
Laura,¶
Today, the FBI pulled the drives that were made available to you for review in the spring to check the numbers. They’ve confirmed that the drive containing the HC images recovered from Epstein’s devices included the same number of HC images and videos reflected in the 302.¶
As for the files being made available for you to review in Colorado, the FBI confirmed today that you will have the following available:¶
| EFTA00075665 | | :--- | :--- |¶
This is a simple Markdown document with no headings or paragraphs. It contains a single line of text.¶
-
26,947 HC images and videos recovered from Epstein’s devices (approximately 7,721 images from the prior drive were de-designated, produced as confidential materials on August 5, 2021, and accordingly not included in the files sent to Colorado).
-
3,459 HC images recovered from the CDs seized from Epstein’s NY residence. These are the same images that were made available for review at the MDC in the fall of 2020.
Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies]¶
Laura,¶
I have asked the FBI to pull the drives that were made available to you at 500 Pearl in the spring to double check the number of files that were made available to you. I have also asked the FBI to doublecheck the number of images and videos on the drive in Colorado.¶
The FBI made the HC images from the CDs available for Chris Everdell to review with Ms. Maxwell at the MDC in the fall of 2020. Specifically FBI agents brought the drive to the MDC on October 23, 2020 and November 6, 2020.¶
Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies]¶
Thank you for your response, however, I’m afraid it has only created more confusion.¶
You made available approximately 5,500 HC images for review at 500 Pearl Street in April, divided between two hard drives. I looked at the two hard-drives and that is the approximate number of files that were located on them.¶
The 302, on the other hand, indicates there are actually 33,747 HC images and 895 HC videos.¶
The difference is approximately 35,000 images and videos. Your sentence (“the correct number of images ( , the number indicated in the 302) was contained on the hard drives made available to you for your review at 500 Pearl in the spring”) is inaccurate, given that the number indicated in the 302 is not at all close to the number of images made available for review at 500 Pearl. Your other sentence (“The first and second categories were both made available for your client and defense counsel to review at 500 Pearl Street in the spring.”) also does not track with my understanding of the correct numbers, . those outlined in the 302. Also, I do not believe that any HC materials have ever been made available at the MDC.¶
EFTA00075666¶
My understanding is that you are only now making available for review approximately 35,000 images and videos that have not previously been made available. Is that true or not true?¶
I will take a look at the files on Wednesday. You can imagine, however, my concern that more than a year after this case was instituted and two months before trial that the majority of photographic materials still has not been made available for review, especially with my client.¶
I am happy to discuss if you feel that an oral explanation would be easier, preferably in advance of my Wednesday review.¶
I really believe this is something that counsel should be able to work out without court intervention.¶
Thanks,¶
Laura¶
Laura A. Menninger | Partner¶
Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C.¶
150 ■. 10th Avenue | Denver, CO 80203¶
Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies]¶
Laura,¶
With respect to your questions about the HC materials, as I noted in my earlier email, we do not know how the miscommunication about the number of images happened. Somehow that number was relayed incorrectly to me from the FBI during my verbal conversations with them. I have confirmed, however, that the correct number of images was saved on the hard drives that were made available to you for review during your trip to New York. In other words, although I was told (and relayed to you) that there was a much smaller number of HC images, the correct number of images (., the number indicated in the 302) was contained on the hard drives made available to you for your review at 500 Pearl in the spring.¶
The HC images come from two sources: First, there were HC images recovered from the CDs seized from Epstein’s New York residence. Second, there were HC images and videos recovered from the electronic devices seized from Epstein during his arrest, the search of his New York residence, and the search of his Virgin Islands residence. The first category of HC images was made available for your client and defense counsel to review at the MDC int eh fall. The first and second categories were both made available for your client and defense counsel to review at 500 Pearl Street in the spring.¶
My understanding from the FBI is that the drive that was sent to Colorado provides the HC images in html files, similar to those contained in the recent production of confidential images dated August 5, 2021. You can refer to the images by the title of the html file in which they are saved and the row number in which they appear within that html file. These files are not Bates stamped because we are not permitted to save them on the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s system, so our paralegals cannot stamp them.¶
| EFTA00075667 | | :--- | :---¶
Our team is continuing to assess what, if any, HC images we may seek to offer at trial. As soon as the team has made a final decision on that score, we will let you know. Given the many moving pieces with trial preparation, however, I cannot provide a more definite timeline at this point.¶
Best,¶
Assistant United States Attorney¶
Southern District of New York¶
1 St. Plaza¶
New York, NY 10007¶
Thank you for getting me some dates and times. Unfortunately something else has come up in the meantime that makes today unworkable. I will plan to be there at 10:30 a.m. next Wednesday and see how far I can get before requesting additional dates and times.¶
In addition to my earlier questions, can you please let me know if there are Bates numbers or other production identifiers / logs for me to work off of during this review?¶
Thank you, Laura¶
Laura,¶
The items are available for review tomorrow after 11 MDT or Wednesday, September 1, after 10:30 MDT. Please let us know when you plan to do the review so I can let the FBI agent know. The review will be a Denver and the FBI agent is . If you need different or additional dates/times, please let us know. will get back to you on your questions about HC materials.¶
Best,¶
| EFTA00075668 | | :--- | :--- |¶
This is a simple Markdown document with no headings or paragraphs. It contains a single line of text.¶
We are available to review the hard-drives and boots this Thursday (8/26), next Tuesday (8/31) or on September 1 st . Let me know which FBI office and any local officer I need to coordinate with for entry to the building.¶
On the topic of HC materials, I don’t believe I have yet received an explanation for statement below (“I have confirmed with the FBI that the larger number contained in the 302 is accurate. I have not been able to figure out where the disconnect arose between the actual number and the number that was verbally conveyed to me, which I then conveyed to you. I apologize for the mistake, which was unintentional.”). Can someone please provide an explanation for the reason those two numbers differed so dramatically? What is the current count of HC photos? Where did all of the HC photos come from?¶
We may need more than one session of viewing, depending on the size of the hard drives. I also may need to re-review with an expert once I have had an opportunity to view any new materials for the first time. I also likely will need to sort out a method of viewing these with my client.¶
Finally, given the volume of HC materials, offered when we were in NY at some point to specify which if any HC materials the government seeks to introduce at trial. If you are able to do that now (prior to my review), it certainly will cut-down on the time needed to review and potential expert fees. Obviously if I am unable to view the materials in sufficient time, we may need to seek extra accommodations to complete the task, and a means of reviewing these new HC materials with Ms. Maxwell, as is her right.¶
Let me know if those dates work and an explanation.¶
Counsel,¶
|¶