EDWARDS POTTINGER LLC Florida Office
Bradley J. Edwards*נ
Seth M. Lehrman*†
Brittany N. Henderson*◊
Matthew D. Weissing*†
425 North Andrews Avenue Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 New York Office J. Stanley Pottinger ‡ July 8, 2021 FOIA PRIVACY EXEMPTION † Admitted in California ◦ Admitted in District of Columbia * Admitted in Florida ‡ Admitted in New York ♣ Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer VIA E-MAIL AND FEDEX The Honorable Audrey Strauss United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Re: Request for Tangible and Documentary Evidence (Touhy Request) Doe v. Darren K. Indyke, et al., SDNY Case No. 1:19-cv-07772 Dear Mr. To follow up to our October 15, 2020 and October 21, 2020 $ ^{1} $ letters, we again request documentary and tangible evidence currently in the in the possession, custody, and control of the Department of Justice by way of the Southern District of New York relating to the sexual abuse of one of Jeffrey Epstein’s many victims, Doe. $ ^{2} $ See United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951). We make this written request pursuant to the Touhy regulations codified as 28 C.F.R. § 16.21 et seq. (a copy of our October 15 and 21, 2020 letters, FedEx receipt and proof of email service are attached hereto). As stated in our prior letters, please contact us should you find any deficiencies in this request, and we will do what is necessary to correct any such shortcomings. Doe was repeatedly sexually assaulted and trafficked by prolific pedophile and rapist, Jeffrey Epstein, from 2006 through 2013. Throughout the years of abuse, Epstein purchased a number of commercial flights, provided housing, and purchased a number of items of value for Doe, record of which we believe is currently in the Government’s possession as a result 1 Our October 21, 2020 letter identified our client as 2 To protect her anonymity, our client has elected to proceed as a Doe. As such, we have referred to her herein using the pseudonym under which she has filed her lawsuit. EFTA00090476 The Honorable Audrey Strauss July 8, 2021 Page 2 of the investigation that was conducted into Epstein’s criminal activity relating to the sexual abuse of minor children. Given the highly relevant nature of this tangible evidence to Doe’s currently pending litigation, we request production of documentary evidence relating to Doe to enable her to prove her claims from both a liability and damages standpoint. 28 C.F.R. § 16.24 (c) states that it is the Department of Justice's policy to authorize the production of materials "whenever possible." Pursuant to the Touhy regulations set forth by the Department, the Deputy or Associate Attorney General assesses the following considerations in determining whether disclosure is warranted: (a) (1) Whether such disclosure is appropriate under the rules of procedure governing the case or mater in which the demand arose; (a) (2) Whether disclosure is appropriate under the relevant substantive law of privilege. See 28 C.F.R. 16.26 (a) This request satisfies both considerations. The requested materials should be disclosed because disclosure is appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 and the relevant substantive law of privilege. The requested documentary evidence is not privileged and directly concerns the allegations in Ms. Doe's civil case. In addition, the requested documents are not excluded from disclosure by 28 C.F.R § 16.26 (b). Disclosure will not violate any statute, rule of procedure or regulation, will not reveal any classified information, confidential source or informant, and will not interfere with law enforcement proceedings or disclose investigative techniques and procedures. In In re The City of New York, 607 F.3d 923, 945 (2nd Cir. 2010), the court recognized that the law enforcement privilege is qualified. See also Miller v. Mehitretter, 478 F. Supp. 415, 424 (W.D. N.Y. 2007) (“When the information sought is both relevant and essential to the presentation of the case on the merits and the need for disclosure outweighs need for secrecy, privilege is overcome.”) While Doe can overcome this privilege if asserted, she specifically does not request any investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes that would interfere with any ongoing law enforcement proceedings. Doe has recently declined an offer from the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Fund and is proceeding to trial in the Southern District of New York. She is simply requesting information in the Government’s possession that will assist in the prosecution of her claims and ultimately, aid in her ability to finally obtain the justice that she deserves. Disclosure of the documents she requests is not prohibited by either section 28 C.F.R 16.26 (a) or (b) and is warranted pursuant to 28 C.F.R §16.26 (c). Subsection 16.26 (c) permits this disclosure, which is necessary for a civil proceeding, because (1) the criminal violations committed against Ms. Doe are serious, (2) Epstein’s criminal behavior was outrageous and notorious; he victimized over a hundred young girls and women, inclusive of Ms. Doe, over the course of more than a decade, and (3) the relief sought in federal court is critically important to Ms. Doe and her ability to prove the degree of abuse she suffered at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein and his friends or associates. Ms. Doe strongly believes that pursuing her claims in federal court will give her and other victims a sense that justice was served. While EFTA00090477 The Honorable Audrey Strauss July 8, 2021 Page 3 the Victims’ Compensation Program offered monetary compensation, it did not provide victims, in particular Ms. Doe, the opportunity to expose Epstein in a court of law for the monster he was. Instead of accepting a monetary settlement, Ms. Doe opted for her “day in court.” The relief sought by Doe will ultimately prove that our judicial system works; however, in order to have the opportunity to achieve the justice she deserves, it is essential that she obtain from the Government those documents and information requested herein. To that end, we specifically seek copies of the following documents that we believe are currently in the possession of the Government: 1) Photographs of Doe; 2) Videos of Doe; 3) Any and all correspondence between Jeffrey Epstein, his agents, employees, medical providers, or attorneys and Doe; 4) Any and all correspondence between Jeffrey Epstein, his agents, employees, medical providers, or attorneys about Doe or which reference Doe; 5) Any and all records of purchases of gifts or anything of value purchased for or sent to Doe; 6) Any and all records showing that a letter or package was sent via U.S. Mail, UPS, FedEx, or by any other means of shipping from Jeffrey Epstein, his agents, or his employees to Doe; 7) Any and all records of payments made to medical providers on behalf of Doe; 8) Any and all records of payments made to attorneys on behalf of Doe; 9) Any and all records of payments made to accountants on behalf of Doe; 10) Any and all records of payments made to Doe; 11) Any and all documents referencing Doe residing at 301 East 66th Street, New York; 12) Any and all documents obtained from property belonging to Jeffrey Epstein that contains Doe's true name; 13) Any and all lists containing or including Doe's true name or any part thereof; and 14) Any and all other documentary materials relating in any way to Doe. 28 C.F.R. 16.24 (d) (1) addresses the resolution of disclosure demands. We are willing to engage in discussions and negotiate a resolution to the request pursuant to section 16.24 (d)(1)(ii). Please contact us at your earliest convenience to discuss Doe’s case in more detail, at which time we are fully prepared to answer any questions that you may have and resolve this matter. Very truly yours, EDWARDS POTTINGER LLC Bradley Edwards Brittany Henderson BJE:mwk