| Subject: | Fwd: (SBU/DP) Urgent Guidance for DOJ: MLAT to Question Prince Andrew |
| Date: | Mon, 08 Jun 2020 17:22:56 +0000 |
Sent from my iPhone¶
Begin forwarded message:¶
Subject: RE: (SBU/DP) Urgent Guidance for DOJ: MLAT to Question Prince Andrew¶
Embassy London team,¶
Prince Andrew’s legal team issued a statement earlier today criticizing DOJ for how we have treated him during the Jeffrey Epstein probe. They claim that he has offered to help with the Department of Justice’s Jeffrey Epstein investigation on “at least three occasions this year” and has not been taken up, also that details have been erroneously briefed by the DOJ “in breach of its own rules of confidentiality” that he is non-cooperative when he is seeking to cooperate. He accuses the DOJ of “perhaps seeking publicity rather than accepting the assistance.”¶
Also, his lawyers claim that two statements by U.S Attorney Geoffrey Berman in January and March that Prince Andrew was not cooperating were “inaccurate” and claim the DOJ actions have led to an “entirely misleading account” of Prince Andrew’s attitude in the media. To view statement in its entirety, see: https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/2020060891177/prince-andrew-breaks-silence-epstein-claims/.¶
Press is asking us to comment on these allegations. If we fire back, it will contradict my previous statement and deviate from our standard practice of not commenting on MLA requests. However, if we respond with an accurate history of the discussions (and an accurate statement of DOJ rules), then others will join in the call for him to testify. It will make more clear that our use of a MLA request was our last choice, after all other avenues were exhausted. I am curious on Embassy’s thoughts. Please advise. thank you¶
Senior Communications Advisor for International Law Enforcement/Spokesperson U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)¶
EFTA00097889¶
Thanks¶
We will still refer to DOJ absent separate guidance from State. So far we have had inquires from Sky and Press Association (PA). PA asked about the impact of the MLAT request on the request for Sacoolas extradition. We have not commented.¶
Hi Matt,¶
I have been responding to press with the following: As a matter of policy, the U.S. Department of Justice does not publicly comment on communications with foreign governments on investigative matters, including confirming or denying the very existence of such communications.¶
Thank you,¶
On Jun 8, 2020, at 3:43 AM,¶
Referring them to DOJ is the correct move. Calls started coming in late last night to DOJ. We have the standard: we do not confirm or deny the existence of investigations. I can get the language if you like but has it.¶
U.S. Dept. of Justice Attaché - London¶
U.S. Mobile:¶
Sent from a mobile device¶