SWORN STATEMENT¶
OIG CASE #:¶
2019-010614¶
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL¶
DECEMBER 2, 2021¶
RESOLUTE DOCUMENTATION SERVICES¶
28632 Roadside Drive, Suite 285¶
Agoura Hills, CA 91301¶
Phone:¶
EFTA00110002¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
APPEARANCES:¶
WITNESS:¶
OTHER APPEARANCES:¶
NONE¶
| EFTA00110003 | | :--- | :---¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
3¶
MR. : All right. The recorder is on. There is also going to be - I’m just going to go over, like, a list of - it’s kind of, like, an introduction, and just kind of a preamble into what we are going to be discussing, and who you are. It’s going to sound very scripted, and that’s because it pretty much is. But you are there still. Correct?¶
EFTA00110004¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110005¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110006¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
This investigation pertains job performance failure and security failure. This is a voluntary interview. Accordingly, you do not have to answer questions. No disciplinary action will be taken against you if you choose not to answer questions. Any statements you furnish may be used as evidence in any future criminal proceedings, or agency disciplinary proceedings, or both.” And there is a waiver section. It says, “I understand the Warnings and Assurances stated above, and I am willing to make statements and answer questions. No promises or threats have been made to me, and no pressure or coercion of any kind has been used against me.” And I see that you signed your signature. You printed your name,¶
And you dated and time¶
12/02/21, at 9:00 a.m. So, I assume that is the time that you reviewed the form?¶
MS. : Yes.¶
MR. : Perfect. And that is your signature on this form?¶
MS. : Yes, it is.¶
MR. : Awesome. And is there any questions you have with regard to the¶
6¶
| EFTA00110007 | | :--- | :---¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110008¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110009¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110010¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
10¶
EFTA00110011¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
11¶
EFTA00110012¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110013¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110014¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
14¶
MR. : And do you know how Tartaglione was selected to be Epstein’s cellmate?¶
MS. : I don’t know. I don’t, I don’t know exactly how he was selected. I do know, after the fact, it was indicated that, because he was former law enforcement, and he didn’t seem like he, I guess he didn’t - he didn’t have anything that, it didn’t appear that he would hurt Epstein, that he was suitable to be Epstein’s cellmate. But I don’t know exactly what the vetting process was for that decision.¶
MR. : Okay. And do you believe that Tartaglione was an appropriate choice for a cellmate?¶
MS. : I’m not going to speculate about that. I do know, at the time that he was a cellmate, that he did not try to harm him. Epstein never voiced any concerns about - that I am aware of - about Tartaglione being his cellmate. But as far as looking at Tartaglione’s charges, or anything to see if he had any risk factors that would indicate that he would harm Epstein, that would be speculation after the fact. So, that, I don’t¶
EFTA00110015¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
15¶
MS. : He was placed on suicide watch, is my understanding.¶
MS. : Oh, yeah. The suicide watch cells are on the, they are on the second -. They are on the second floor. On the same floor as the health services department. So, around the corner, and it’s down the hall from psychology. From the psychology department¶
EFTA00110016¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
16¶
EFTA00110017¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
17¶
If someone is on suicide watch, and then psychological observation, how would they meet with their attorneys?¶
MS. : Typically, if someone is on suicide watch, they do not have visits, and they don’t - because they’re on watch - they would be under constant, whether it was an inmate companion, or a staff watch. So, typically, a person on suicide watch would not have visits. So, if a visit did happen during suicide watch, I would gather that that person will still be under the same observation protocol. Obviously, another inmate would not be able to watch them because of the privacy factor with the visit, but I would, I would assume that a staff member would be present.¶
MR. : Okay. Now, would they be present on that second floor suicide watch area, psychological observation area? Or would that be conducted in the attorney visit rooms of the MCC?¶
MS. : So, again, typically, visits don’t happen when a person is on suicide watch. And because of the placement where suicide watch is, there is no visits that happen in¶
EFTA00110018¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
18¶
EFTA00110019¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
19¶
EFTA00110020¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
20¶
determination to say that he would then be taken off of suicide watch, and then placed in the attorney conference area.¶
MR. : Okay. Great. So, I take it, then, is it that MCC psychology department, are they the ones who determined that Epstein should be on suicide watch, and then psychological observation?¶
MS. : Well, anyone can actually place someone on suicide watch, if that person voices - and when I say “anyone,” for instance, if I call a psychologist is not there after hours, someone voices an intent to harm themselves, the lieutenant can make that decision to place the person on suicide watch. But psychology typically is the one that would determine whether someone is taken off of suicide watch because they would have to do a suicide risk assessment, and any other clinical assessment.¶
So, placing someone on suicide watch - again - depending on the time, it can be psychology, or it can be a correctional services staff member. And then, the removal would be someone from psychology, to say that this person is not deemed suicide, or, you¶
EFTA00110021¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
21¶
know, they are safe to be in general population.¶
MR. : Okay. And then, but it would also - and correct me if I’m wrong - but it did sound like you said that it would have been psychology’s decision to allow Epstein to visit with his attorneys while he was on suicide watch or psychological observation?¶
MS. : No. I don’t know if that was what actually occurred. But to remove someone from suicide watch, that would be a psychology decision.¶
MR. : So, when you say “remove someone,” do you mean, like, just for those hours that he was visiting, or are you talking about when he was removed and placed back in the SHU?¶
MS. : Typically, when you remove someone, it’s not for an hour or two. It’s typically, you are saying that that person poses no more risk to themselves, so they are off. Basically, they are going back to general population. So, I am not aware of any situation where you remove a person for an hour or two, or for a short timeframe, and then¶
EFTA00110022¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
22¶
MS. : Yes. I don’t know. Again, I don’t know who made the ultimate decision for that to happen. But I know the process for removal of suicide watch ,and what that process entails. And that is why I’m saying, to remove someone off of suicide watch, it would have to be someone in psychology, to say that that is appropriate. But in this instance, I don’t know, I don’t know if that was communicated. If that actually occurred. So, I hope, hopefully that answers the question.¶
MR. : Sure. Yeah.¶
EFTA00110023¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
23¶
EFTA00110024¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
24¶
warden, in consultation with correctional services, because it falls under custody care and control. And so, that decision was made to place him in Special Housing.¶
MR. : Okay. Do you know, did you, MCC executive staff, or anyone, including the warden, receive any calls, or was any contacted by lawyers, or a judge, asking for Epstein to be removed from suicide watch or psychological observation?¶
MS. : That, I am not aware of any communication about that.¶
MR. : So, that actually having him removed. So, back on July, you know, 30th, when he was removed. Would yourself or executive staff, would you have been a part of the process of actually taking him off of suicide watch or psychological observation?¶
MS. : No.¶
EFTA00110025¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
25¶
EFTA00110026¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
26¶
EFTA00110027¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110028¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
28¶
EFTA00110029¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
29¶
MR. : Okay. So, since Epstein was required to have a cellmate, who was ultimately responsible to make sure that all SHU staff were aware of his cellmate requirement?¶
MS. : Oh. Okay. And because - I’m just going to say this - because it’s Special Housing, Special Housing is governed under correctional services. It would be the captain is typically in charge of correctional services. And there is a SHU lieutenant that is assigned to the Special Housing on a daily basis. That that is that person’s daily assignment. And they are responsible for ensuring that everything is in compliance in Special Housing. And so, there should be some communication, if then, like I said, psychology made a decision that he had to have a cellmate. Everyone was aware of it, but that, like, verbal communication, or insurance, it should have happen in the correctional services. The captain. The lieutenant. And then, that information communicated down to the staff that¶
EFTA00110030¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
30¶
EFTA00110031¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
31¶
EFTA00110032¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
32¶
EFTA00110033¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
33¶
There is -. You have the SHU number one, SHU number two, the three, and the four. So, you at least have four staff, and you have staff that are SHU (Indiscernible *00:29:46). So, there is several staff assigned to the Special Housing Unit. So, and at that -. So, I can’ say with certainty who was engaging in a conversation. And then, like I said, and then you have the SHU lieutenant. So, it was several folks that were assigned to the Special Housing. And again, I don’t know specifically who said what, but I do know that it was known because I verbally, I heard it, it was audible. I heard it.¶
EFTA00110034¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
34¶
EFTA00110035¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
35¶
EFTA00110036¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
36¶
MS. : No. I don’t -. That, I don’t know because they are assigned to work other departments, and they were working overtime. But what I do know - because I also, when I first started working in the Bureau, I was a correctional officer - I do know that you should engage in conversation with whomever it is that you are relieving, to find out, is there any special precautions, or you pass on your equipment, you talk about what your base count is. So, there, there should be some communication between you and the staff member that you are relieving.¶
MR. : Now, do you believe, if the person is quarterly assignment was the SHU, they would have known, and should have known?¶
MS. : Yeah. Yes.¶
MR. : Okay. So, fi you know that Tova Nova was actually assigned to the SHU for that quarterly post, does that change¶
EFTA00110037¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
37¶
EFTA00110038¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
38¶
EFTA00110039¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
39¶
staff, indicating these inmates are on the hot list, or these are some important factors about specific inmates.¶
So, there is, there is information, and there is things that you are required to do, as part of your assignment in SHU, that you would have to know who can even go in recreation, in the recreation cage, with whom. It’s because of separation. So, there is information that you have to be able to, you have to know, in order for you to make safe decisions during your eight hours of having oversight over the inmates.¶
MR. : So - great - so, you touched on the hot list. Can you just very briefly explain what the hot list is?¶
MS. : Well, the hot list is, it’s, like a list that kind of, that psychology puts together, and it has information about, at times, who is on suicide alert, or of any kind of risk factors, or something that requires special care for just specific inmates. So, it is, your base count, or the SHU can help maybe have the capacity to hold maybe 80 inmates, right? And if - not everyone is on the hot¶
EFTA00110040¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
40¶
EFTA00110041¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
41¶
EFTA00110042¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
42¶
EFTA00110043¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110044¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
44¶
MS. : I don’t recall of a conversation specific to that. But I do know, as part of, not just Epstein, but any inmate, if they are required to have cellmates, if you are doing your rounds, and the cellmate is not in there, it could be because that cellmate is inside of the recreation cage, but if it is a prolonged thing —¶
EFTA00110045¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
45¶
MS. : Mm-hmm.¶
MR. : — what about if the SHU lieutenant is off? So, on the 9th, Lieutenant is off that day. There is no SHU lieutenant. What should have happened with SHU staff? Who should have they contacted?¶
MS. : There is always a lieutenant. So, even if , who is the SHU lieutenant, is not physically there, there is always a lieutenant in the building, 24 hours.¶
MR. : Sure.¶
MS. : That person is -. So, there is the management official, after hours. And so, when there is any kind of emergency, or an inmate situation that rises to the level of contact, there is a management official there. And they have received calls. And they then call the captain, and then, the captain can determine whether or not he wants some, you know, to increase the level and call the AW, but there is always a lieutenant in the institution.¶
MR. : Okay. And so, they should have contacted one of the lieutenants, and you are referring to the two lieutenants¶
EFTA00110046¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
46¶
EFTA00110047¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
47¶
EFTA00110048¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
48¶
EFTA00110049¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
49¶
MR. : Okay. So, but there is a, it sounds like a court list, or a production, an inmate production list that is created by R&D?¶
MS. : That is - yeah - that is my understanding.¶
MR. : And what happens with that document? Like, so, the staff members utilize it, then where does the document go? Is it saved somewhere, like BOPWARE, or TruScope, or is it something that they print out, and then they destroy, or do they keep it?¶
MS. : Well, I know that R&D definitely should have a cop of the court roster. They should. Now, as far as what the housing unit would do with it, I would believe that they probably would shred it because it serves no purpose to that specific housing unit. But R&D would maintain copies of the court roster.¶
EFTA00110050¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
50¶
MR. : Now, if R&D is saying that they actually don’t keep a copy, it’s like a template that they revise every day, based upon what inmates need to be produced. So, they actually don’t have any records from past, you know, production lists. Does that sound accurate to you?¶
MS. Hmm. From my understanding, I would think that a copy would be maintained.¶
And that there would also possibly be a logbook. Because I - again - at the time, I’m, you know, an associate warden, but, and I never specifically worked in Receiving and Discharge. But from my understanding of being in Receiving and Discharge, and from our early, my early years of being a correctional officer, I am aware of, like, if a receipt is being maintained, because someone keys in inmates in, and keys inmates out in Sentry. And there, at times, control even annotates things in their daily, their daily log.¶
MR. : Yeah.¶
MS. : So, of, like, of movement. Depending on the control room officer, that officer may even take the time to list the¶
EFTA00110051¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
51¶
names, to actually write out names and register numbers. Or they just might write out the numerical value of how many inmates departed for court, versus how many departed, like, with all belongings. Because that means that the inmate is not returning, and he would definitely have to be taken off your base count, in order to get an accurate count.¶
MR. : Okay. So, and I know we’re not in person, so I’m going to have to just explain to you what I’m looking at. I have two emails that were sent to the MCC. One was to - both from the U.S. Marshal Service - one was to just Receiving and Discharge personnel, and another one was sent, it looks like to, like to a large amount of custody personnel, including lieutenants, it looks like Tijuana , who I believe was the SIS lieutenant. It looks like , who was an AW, is on there. As well as a number of other people. Quite a large number of people. I do not see your name on here. But it does say the subject, “Prisoner Production 8/9/2019,” the date is Thursday, August 8th, 2019, at 3:36 p.m.¶
EFTA00110052¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110053¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
53¶
EFTA00110054¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
54¶
MR. : Okay. And then, when it says, “Destination description,” it says, “WAB/MED summary.” Does that tell you anything?¶
MS. : Yeah. Well, WAB. WAB means With All Belongings. Now, /MED summary means medical summary. So, when I’m first hearing you say WAB, that lets me know that the person is leaving. That means with all belongings. So, typically, when someone is scheduled for transfer, you have the time to pack them out, and so, they would come down, you know, prior to the date. But with WAB, that means that the person is leaving that day, and then they should come down with all of their belongings. Everything that they have because for whatever reason, they’re not coming back, they’re going somewhere else.¶
people, the first two people both say,¶
“Transfer within.” Both of them say MCC to¶
EFTA00110055¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
55¶
EFTA00110056¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
56¶
EFTA00110057¶
EFTA00110058¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
58¶
MS. : Yeah. No. That’s not necessarily the responsibility of custody to view -. There is -. I will say this. There is no procedures in place, or their responsibility that exists, that would say that custody had to review a court production list. Typically, they don’t -. They may have received a list as a courtesy. But okay. It’s a courtesy. It wasn’t necessarily something that they may or may not have to have some, you know, to do something with the list. It’s not¶
EFTA00110059¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
59¶
EFTA00110060¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
60¶
EFTA00110061¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110062¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110063¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110064¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110065¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110066¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
66¶
maintain because of that, I kept receiving, like, inquiries after as to what documents I had. And so, let me see what I -. See if I have anything that shows that. Okay. Hold on. I’m going to have go out -. Okay. So, I have -. Okay. One thing I had, that I have a title for was just, like, was his (Indiscernible *01:04:43) and entry information. Special Housing review. Okay. That’s not showing me the court date. R&D. Okay. Hold on one second. Let me see which drop file. No. The drop file. (Indiscernible *01:05:16). Let me see. Man, I don’t -. That, as an attachment. I don’t have that as an attachment. I do -. I am able to look at other things. But a court list. I don’t have that as a court list. I don’t have the court list.¶
MS. : Yeah. Because I saw - there were things that I saved. That’s how I was able to send them, you know, to other¶
EFTA00110067¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110068¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
68¶
EFTA00110069¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
69¶
EFTA00110070¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
70¶
list that, I’m just saying that, because my understanding is, R&D, you know, prints out all the same court production lists, and they provide it to the different housing units, and to the ops lieutenant, and to, you know, the different various people that need to be in the know with who is being produced. So, that is all —¶
MS. : A copy of it. You’re saying a copy. It could have -. It had to be a copy of something. But I don’t know if it was, if it was the court production list, or some kind of Sentry roster. That, because you could print a Sentry roster also, that shows, like you said,¶
EFTA00110071¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
71¶
EFTA00110072¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
72¶
at all of my emails I saved. Well, what I - whom I turned things over to, or what I’ve turned, what I turned over.¶
MR. : That would be great. Specifically, we would be very interested in that court documentation regarding, you know,¶
MR. : And is it surprising to you now, though, since again, like, you thought that he was at court, and then released on, you know, released from there, but now that you see that you actually wrote, “Court documentation regarding WAB,” is that surprising?¶
MS. : Well, I won’t say it’s -. I won’t use the word “surprising.” But it would jog my memory to say, okay, you - like I Said - if he left on WAB, I have something that says WAB, that is what it was. WAB. But did I know at the time, or was I in the know? No. This is after the fact.¶
MR. : Right, right, right. No.¶
I’m just saying the, you know, it seems like a lot of people seemed to think that he was, you know, sent to court and released, whereas, you¶
EFTA00110073¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
73¶
know, as we just discussed, he was actually transferred. So, I was just wondering if that surprised you to find out that, oh, wow, I actually did know he was WAB after the, you know, on —¶
MS. : — yeah, that part, because that is, like you said, that has been, that has been the discussion all along, that went to court, and he was released from court. So, I’m hoping that my information is accurate, but typically, when you - because it’s now, it seems like, it conflicts, obviously, with what everyone’s recollection is - but typically, when you see WAB, that means With All Belongings, that the person is leaving, they are transferring. Now, how the whole court got into play, maybe, I don’t know. And I don’t want to speculate, because it is just going to, you know, further confuse everything.¶
MR. : Okay. Yeah. No. I think we’ve definitely cleared up the fact that he was WAB, and he transferred, just upon the emails that we, you know, I talked to you about¶
EFTA00110074¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
74¶
EFTA00110075¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110076¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
76¶
EFTA00110077¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
77¶
MS. : That was, it’s just logical connections, if you wanted - if you know you have an incident, and you know something happened, in the Special Housing, and there is only two inmates that are in the cell, you know you are not only going to focus on, quote unquote, “The victim.” You have to then also turn your attention to who was in the cell at the time. So, to me, anything that I gathered, as far as Sentry information for Epstein, or his Special Housing Unit record, I gathered the same for his cellmate because that’s just a logical thing to do.¶
MR. : Sure. And that is what I’m asking for my question. Being that you logically gathered these documents, and you can see that you wrote the document, I’m asking, like, can you recall what would be - what would have been the logical document that you would have gathered, that would have showed that he was —¶
MS. : Mm-hmm. I don’t, I don’t know if I would have gone in R&D to see, or if I ran¶
EFTA00110078¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
78¶
EFTA00110079¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
79¶
EFTA00110080¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
80¶
EFTA00110081¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110082¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110083¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
83¶
MS. Because as the OIC, that means that you are, if you look at the post orders, you are basically have oversight of SHU, for lack of a better term. You should make sure that the rounds are being conducted. If inmates needs to be pulled out for whatever reason. That the appropriate inmates are going in their appropriate cages, so that, you know, separate tees are adhered to. That inmates are being fed. That sanitation is being conducted.¶
And it, and because you are now telling me that this individual, whomever the individual is, is saying that they were aware that Epstein needed a cellmate, and that his cellmate was leaving, they knew, so when you know something, then you should, either you’re going to - if you didn’t want to make the determination to make another decision about who the cellmate would be, then you need to contact your¶
EFTA00110084¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
84¶
supervisor.¶
If you, yourself, can’t make a decision, you contact your supervisor who is authorized to make that decision. But you must make the contact in order for your supervisor to know. And as an OIC, you are aware of who you can contact.¶
MS. : That’s plainly known that you can contact the lieutenant when something is going on, especially for something that, it’s not, it’s the Special Housing Unit, that you must be able to get a decision maker.¶
MR. : Okay. So, he should have notified a lieutenant, is basically the long and short of it?¶
MS. : Yes. Yes. The long and short of it, he should have notified a lieutenant.¶
MR. : Okay. And are you aware if - we are going to just touch on counts and rounds that were conducted in the SHU - are you aware if the SHU counts and rounds were not conducte by the SHU staff on August 9th and 10th of 2019?¶
MS. : I was aware after the fact that¶
EFTA00110085¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110086¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
86¶
MR. : Okay. Did either Thomas or Noel say that that, you know, tell you that information directly?¶
MS. : No. I didn’t -. I haven’t even, from the day of the incident, I have not laid eyes on either one of them.¶
MS. : Besides on TV. So, I have not spoken to either one of them. Well, no, and I’m not going to say I haven’t spoken to either one of them. I did call to make welfare checks on staff members, to see if they were okay, and that was weeks after, because they haven’t been at work, and that’s what we were told to do, to call the staff members, just to say, you know, if you’re okay. Because they physically were not in the institution. But as far as discussing the incident, and what they did and did not do, I did not engage in that.¶
MR. : Okay. And did you learn anything, you know, during your time on this, did you learn anything about the accuracy of the MCC SHU counts and rounds on August 9th and 10th of 2019?¶
MS. : You said did I run anything as¶
EFTA00110087¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
87¶
EFTA00110088¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
88¶
EFTA00110089¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
89¶
EFTA00110090¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
90¶
EFTA00110091¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110092¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
92¶
EFTA00110093¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
93¶
MR. : So, when we went through everything, we found that there was some discrepancies based upon what was on the lieutenant’s log versus what was on institutional count, which was on the, you know, count slips. There are different things. And then, you know, looking through the lieutenant log, we see that, on August 10th, during the night, at around 12:30 a.m., it has a note in there, saying that they keyed Fernandez out of the SHU, or out of the SHU, and into wherever, R&D. And that’s how we were able to figure out, okay, these count slips are actually all off.¶
MS. : Oh.¶
MR. : They are saying that they were counting this many bodies, whereas, in fact, there was one less because he wasn’t¶
EFTA00110094¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
94¶
EFTA00110095¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
95¶
EFTA00110096¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
96¶
MS. : That is maybe that is what prompted it, but like I said, I knew something happened with the count, and from that, I - myself and Lieutenant were trying to gather the count slips, and it should be a 30-day file maintained in control, and we were not able to find the count slips. So, I didn’t know it. Well, now that you’re telling me, I didn’t know it was because of that. And there is some things that I was in the know about, that I - or I wasn’t - but I knew it had something to do, like, is that with the counts, and we were told to get some of the count slips.¶
EFTA00110097¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110098¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
98¶
MR. : — an activities lieutenant, an operation lieutenant. When a lieutenant goes to the SHU and conducts a round, what should they be doing when they conduct a round?¶
MR. : So, is there, is the SHU-. Is a lieutenant round the same thing as a staff round, where you are supposed to go up and actually check on the inmates?¶
MS. Hmm. I’m not going to say it’s the exact same thing because the staff in SHU, they actually have to record that they have done rounds. And by them recording that, they are indicating that they recorded timely rounds, and that they actually are able to say with certainty that they looked, you know, that they verified that all the inmates are there, and that they are alive. Versus a lieutenant, what your responsibility is, you are just making, you are generally making sure that you go around and ensure that everything is okay. But are you specifically and stopping at every single cell? I wouldn’t say necessarily that¶
EFTA00110099¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110100¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110101¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
101¶
Special Housing Unit. So, I don’t know if his tag was removed. But you - by us talking - you indicated that the SHU staff was aware that he was leaving. So, they put the tags up, they should remove the tags. And there would be no reason to keep a tag on the door, indicating that there is two inmates. One, when you are aware that he is no longer going to be there.¶
MS. : I would -. You would conduct a-. I would say yes. Because especially if you have a highlighted inmate, or an inmate of great concern. Or someone that you know you need to check on. If you are not going to look at anybody else’s cell, you would definitely look at, or check on, the inmates that are of concern, to even say, hey, you okay? Or, you know, just to talk with them, or physically see them. So, I would say that you would - yeah - that you would have looked in his cell to see something, that something is going on.¶
EFTA00110102¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110103¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
103¶
necessarily a policy, but just, that’s good practice. Is that what you are saying?¶
MS. : Yeah. Yeah. That’s what I’m saying. And because it was known, as you and I discussed, that he should have a cellmate. So, there’s certain things that you would be checking for, you would be checking for his welfare, and you would also be checking to make sure that those recommendations were adhered to because you want to make sure, with certainty, if you are saying that you made the round, you are annotating it in the book that you made the round. And you would want to say that you actually went around to them, and you checked on these things.¶
MR. : But is there any kind of BOP or MCC policy or directive that, you know, they would have violated, if they didn’t in fact check on Epstein’s cell?¶
MS. : I can’t say that it would be a-. I don’t know about the lieutenant, that they would say that, because they didn’t look in one cell or two cells. But I do know, if you are indicating, and then, that’s another thing. If you are, when you come inside of the¶
EFTA00110104¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
104¶
Special Housing Unit, there is a logbook. If you are annotating in the logbook that you are visiting, or if you are indicating in the logbook that you are doing a round, you-. So, I’m going to backtrack what I said before.¶
MR. : Well, there is an actual log sheet that they sign. So, the lieutenants actually have to sign that they conducted their round.¶
MS. : So then, that’s why I’m going to backtrack then. If you are saying that you did rounds, that means that you should have looked in all of the cells.¶
MR. : Okay. And so, for a lieutenant, that - and that, so, this is where we’ve been getting kind of different information - some lieutenants are saying, absolutely, you need to go down each range, check on every cell door. Other lieutenants are saying, no, no, no, no, we’re just supposed to check in with the staff member that are in there, and make sure that they don’t have any problems. Our rounds are really conducted on the staff members, not on the inmates. So, that is where I am - and there is nothing that¶
EFTA00110105¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
105¶
I can find, specifically in policy, that really specifies that information.¶
MS. : Yeah. So, I - and that’s where I was kind of weaving back and forth. A lieutenants’ purpose, let’s just say in the general housing, like, general, you know, GP. You are making rounds on the unit, you’re checking on, generally, you’re checking on the unit itself. And you don’t, you would not go down, and checking every cell, because that’s general population. You don’t anticipate being in SHU. And you are making yourself available in the event that the staff member needs something. So, you are physically supposed to go. But if it’s the Special Housing Unit, and then, also 10 South, which MCC also has.¶
MS. : Your responsibility level, because of the practices, or just you knowing, inherently, what you should be doing, it’s a little different than the just making yourself available to the staff. You are not just there for the staff. You are also there for the inmates because they can’t come to you. You have to go to them.¶
EFTA00110106¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
106¶
EFTA00110107¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
107¶
with that in mind, you typically know that that means that you are stopping at every door, and you are talking to the inmates, because again, your purpose in SHU is to provide information, and again, it’s not like they can come out to you. So, you have to go to them.¶
MR. : So, just to wrap this thing up, if a lieutenant is saying that they did not conduct any rounds of cells, they just stopped in and talked to staff members. Do you believe that they did something wrong?¶
MS. : I would say that I don’t think that they acted responsibly. I don’t want to say it’s wrong or right because, you know, then that person could say this, it’s not written, but I would say that that’s not a responsible decision.¶
MR. : Okay. So, you do believe that certification that they are signing, that they conducted a round in the SHU, is that they¶
EFTA00110108¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
108¶
MS. : I know there was some -. And again, this is information that has become available after the fact. I know it has become known after the fact that there was some cameras that were not working. And that were not recorded. But did I know the day of the incident? No. I did not know on the day of the incident.¶
MS. : I know that, I don’t know why they were not working on that day, but I know¶
EFTA00110109¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
109¶
EFTA00110110¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
110¶
EFTA00110111¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110112¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
112¶
transcript to find out exactly if we were talking about the SHU, but she says that — MS. : Mm-hmm.¶
MR. : — the two of you were trying, were attempting to review video, and you were unable to review it because there was, you couldn’t find the recording, or you couldn’t rewind. So, the, you know, the determination was made between the two of you, and I can actually, let me pull up the actually specific part of what she, of what she said here. To see if you think it’s accurate. So, it says, “I remember stepping into his office.” Oh, okay.¶
So, “I remember stepping into his office, which was right next door to mine, and notifying him that the camera was down, and I’m trying to get back to look at footage, and I can’t. Actually, I had one of the associate wardens with me, as well, who happens to be his supervisor.” “So,” I said, “Who was that?” “Associate Warden ■.” “■ was there?” “Yes.” “Okay.” “It was me and her together, looking at the camera.”¶
“Okay. So, it wasn’t ? It¶
EFTA00110113¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
113¶
EFTA00110114¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110115¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
115¶
said, “Oh, all right. And do you know if they had any conversations with Daniel about a need to get them back up?” She said, “I don’t know if they had a separate conversation, but when I called Mr. Daniel over to radio, Ms. was still standing there with me in the office, and she was there with me when he came up to check because we thought it was something that may be he could just go in and it allow us to go to the camera, and look for what we were looking for.”¶
I then said, “And when he mentioned the whole -”. So then, we started talking about overtime, and when he couldn’t fix it, I said, “And when he mentioned the whole, I’ll stay overtime, was she there when - was there - when he mentioned that he would stay to work overtime?” And she said, “I can’t remember.”¶
MS. : Well, and I know that, if I had a conversation with Daniel, or anybody, about the cameras not recording, versus you not being able to rewind on your, on the Nice Vision.¶
That that would have been something that would, that I would have known that was important.¶
And I’m trying to differentiate because there¶
EFTA00110116¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
116¶
are there, and I have had the experience that I have access to Nice. And I was not able to actually rewind on one of the cameras.¶
But it’s not because the camera was not recording. It’s because it was, the camera was not programmed correctly or something. I don’t even know if I’m using the proper word. But it’s not that the camera was not recording. It had something to do more with you’re not being able to pull it up and rewind it on the Nice Vision application. But it’s not the same as it not being recorded. So, that’s why I was asking you, is she saying that we knew that it was not recording? Because that’s not my knowledge, or my understanding, that the cameras were not recording.¶
MR. : Okay. Yeah. No. Her specific words were, “I remember stepping into his office, which was right next door to mine, and notifying him that the camera was down. And I’m trying to go back and look at the footage, and I can’t. Actually, I had one of the associate wardens with me —¶
MS. : Yeah.¶
MR. : — as well.”¶
EFTA00110117¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
117¶
EFTA00110118¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110119¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110120¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
120¶
hey, we are trying to review this video. We are not able to do it. Can you figure out what’s going on with the cameras?¶
EFTA00110121¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
121¶
EFTA00110122¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
122¶
to rewind to see what happened. Because we were able to pull the image up. We were just not able to rewind. So, that is what I’m saying. There is, and it might sound like I’m trying to be very specific and deliberate, because I am, because there is a difference with you accessing the Nice system, and I’m not an electronic - an electrician - or, you know, an electronic person, and I could physically see it, I could see it, but I am not able to rewind. That doesn’t let me know that, oh, the system is not recording. So, that would not have ever been part of the conversation. The conversation would have been limited to, why is it that I am able to look at it, but I can’t rewind?¶
EFTA00110123¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110124¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
124¶
So, that is why I am not, I am not - I can’t recall this (Indiscernible *01:56:39), oh, this person was there, that person was there, because it wasn’t, it wasn’t, in my mind, highlighted that the camera system was down.¶
MR. : Okay. So, what we have learned is that, that is when Daniel checked on the system, and he realized that - and this, there is nothing that we learned that, you know, have any knowledge of this, so I will just, you know, put that out front - -s that Daniel said he checked on the system, and he realized that two of the drives were down, and when two drives go down, it stops the system from recording. So, half of the cameras in the institution stopped, were not recording at the time. And this was basically learned on August 8th and August 9th, when he was trying to fix the system. Were you ever made aware of that information?¶
MS. □: No. I was not.¶
MR. □: Okay. Is this the first time you are even hearing of that information?¶
MS. □: Absolutely.¶
EFTA00110125¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
125¶
MS. : Yeah. So, he should have definitely told his first line supervisor, who would have known to then tell his supervisor, and if I am the common denominator, because I am, I was the AW, and I probably was supervising facilities at the time, that information, at some point, would have made it to me.¶
MR. : All right. So, this is another one of those everyone seemed to be out on the 9th, at least. Mr. Nobile was the facilities manager, and he was actually out that entire week. So, he wasn’t in the know that the cameras were down. So, it was just —¶
MS. : There is a, there is a -.¶
Okay. So, there is his -. So, Daniel’s first line supervisor is not actually Nobile. Nobile¶
EFTA00110126¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
126¶
EFTA00110127¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110128¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
128¶
MR. : That these things would go down, he would have to rebuild the system, and then the cameras would be down for, you know, a period of 24 hours, while the system rebuilt. Were you aware of that?¶
MS. : — so, this is one-month in. So, if there were historical issues with the camera, I have no way of knowing what existed because I was not present then. But at the time that I was present, there is no mention of those cameras being down. And again, because of that incident, there was obviously heightened attention to the cameras, and who you should notify when you are aware that a camera is down. But at the time ,when I was,¶
EFTA00110129¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
129¶
you know, like I said, a recent arrival, there was no mention or a discussion that I was aware of about any issues with the camera.¶
EFTA00110130¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
130¶
mention that the camera was not recording, there is a difference when instruction, based on knowledge that the cameras are not working, versus knowledge that the camera that I can see it, but I can’t rewind it:¶
EFTA00110131¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
131¶
MS. : I don’t (Indiscernible *02:02:48). I don’t -. I actually, I don’t recall because, again, at the time, when we were looking at the camera, you can see it. So, there was, there was never any discussion, or there was never even no information to say that the camera was not working. There was never any discussion about that. So, to follow up on an issue that you don’t know is present, I would say that that’s, if I didn’t have a further discussion about it, it’s because of that, that there was no discussion that the camera was not recording.¶
MR. : Okay. So, from the knowledge that you do have, that, you know, you know, according to , she was saying she knew that the cameras weren’t recording, and they were down. And then, Daniel saying that he was going to fix them, and he clearly knew the cameras weren’t recording. What should have happened?¶
MS. : Well, first, I want to clarify, you are saying that said that she knew the cameras were not recording.¶
MR. : She - yeah - her -. That¶
EFTA00110132¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
132¶
EFTA00110133¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
133¶
EFTA00110134¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
134¶
Daniel provided, that, I have never had a conversation to say that the reason why you can’t rewind is because the cameras are not recording. I don’t know. I can’t say what knew. If she understood that that’s what that meant. I know that I know that that’s -. I did not know that that’s what that meant. So, if Daniel never came back, and said, oh, the cameras are not recording, that is a difference with then just saying that, oh, you could see the camera, you are thinking that the camera is working. If you pull up a camera on the Nice Vision (Phonetic Sp. *02:05:52), and you could actually see the image and everything, you are thinking that the camera is recording. So, how else would -? Why else would you think that it’s not recording?¶
she knew that they weren’t. That’s why she wrote the memo to the captain, and that’s why -¶
EFTA00110135¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
135¶
EFTA00110136¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
136¶
That’s what she did. But from there, it -¶
EFTA00110137¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
137¶
I wish had said to me, hey, I received this memo from , saying that the cameras are not working. And that I spoke with Daniel, and the cameras are not working, they are not recording. And that is something that I could have definitely said, okay, Daniel, you have to do overtime, in the absence of your supervisor, I am authorizing you to do overtime, to then fix the cameras, and then, when something like that happens, obviously, you know you have to make security related decisions.¶
Then you could have recalled all the inmates, so that if there is any incidents that happened, at least the inmates are confined to their cells. And then, you say, well, there is no cameras inside of the cells. But you make rounds. You have to make rounds in Special Housing anyway. You know? So, you wouldn’t be able to capture what’s happening inside of the cell itself. But you would have a general idea about, you know, with the cameras, what’s going on.¶
But there would have been decisions that would have been made, to ensure security. But¶
EFTA00110138¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110139¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
139¶
MS. : Hmm. No. I didn’t know that they were scheduled to be replaced. I know again - there is information that you-. I don’t know if they were scheduled to be replaced. I know that they have been, they were upgraded after. And then, I know there was certain projects. But I don’t-. I, again, I don’t know what I-. That, if they were scheduled to be replaced at the time of the incident.¶
EFTA00110140¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
140¶
EFTA00110141¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
141¶
EFTA00110142¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
142¶
on that is, when should the new camera system, that was already on site at the MCC, have been installed? Do you have even a -? Or do you just not have knowledge on that because you weren’t there at the time?¶
MS. : Yeah. So, I don’t have knowledge of that.¶
MR. Okay. Do you know who would have been ultimately responsible for ensuring -? Because it sounds - and again, you weren’t there at the time, but there was a lot of problems, the same problem happened time and time again, at the MCC, where these cameras would -. Two hard drives would crash, and then take out the system. And then, Daniel would have to go and rebuild the system, and it was, like, a 24 hour process to rebuild it.¶
MR. : Who should have made sure that new camera system was installed? That was on site. Who should have, like, said, like, this is an urgent matter? And I am assuming it was. Was that an urgent matter, if the cameras are down?¶
MS. : Mm-hmm. Yeah.¶
EFTA00110143¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
143¶
MS. : It’s multi-layered. And when it’s a multi -. This is multi-layered. Because if you are saying that, who actually does the work for the installation, or who the primary person is the electronics technician. But ultimately, they have a supervisor, and that supervisor tracks the completion of projects. The progress of projects. So, it’s - that’s what I’m saying - it’s multi-layered. That, and if the cameras were present, I don’t know what would have happened to make them not be installed.¶
reason why they were on site, the reason why you guys were able to get your cameras¶
EFTA00110144¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
144¶
immediately back up and running, with a whole new system, was because they were already on site. So, knowing that information, what is your thought on the matter? Like, the fact, now that you are hearing, and again, this is, I’m looking at you as a subject matter expert. I am not looking for any type -.¶
I’m not accusing you of anything. I’m just looking at you as you are a boss there. You are in charge of custody. So, I am just kind of giving you this information, so you can give me your professional feedback. So, the fact that they were able to immediately install this, have SigNet come in, who was the contracted company, and install these new cameras that had been on site since October of 2018 —¶
MR. : Do you think that they were, you know, the MCC, or, you know, really dropped the ball with having this faulty camera system, and actually having the parts that they¶
EFTA00110145¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
145¶
needed on site, to be able to be replaced?¶
MS. : I’m careful with saying about this, who dropped the ball. I know if you know that there is cameras present. And there is no logical reason why the cameras can’t be installed. And if it is your department that is responsible for installing the cameras, then you should ultimately ensure that the cameras are installed. And -.¶
MR. : Now, should - would it fall on the facilities manager to make sure that that’s happening?¶
MS. : The Comtech works for the facility manager. So, the facility manager is responsible for the department that that staff member works in.¶
MR. : — according to Daniel, he said that his job was basically to fix it. His job, you know, fix things when they’re broken. And he had been screaming that there was a problem with these camera systems for a long time, and he’s basically the reason why they got the new cameras, but he said, you¶
EFTA00110146¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
146¶
know, it wasn’t his job to get SigNet there, to be able to actually get these installed.¶
EFTA00110147¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
147¶
EFTA00110148¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
148¶
EFTA00110149¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
149¶
EFTA00110150¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
150¶
EFTA00110151¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
151¶
EFTA00110152¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
152¶
EFTA00110153¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
153¶
any lieutenants, whether it be the SHU lieutenant, or the captain, or, you know, ops, activities lieutenant, should any of them caught this?¶
MS. : Well, they would have only know that if they actually looked at a roster, and physically walked with a roster, to know which cell he was in. But I’m thinking about the 292s, whether or not it would have the cell on it. I’m not sure if the 292 -. Do you know what I’m talking about when I say 292?¶
MR. : Yeah. His file that is kept in the housing unit.¶
MS. : Does it have this -? I’m not even sure if it has the cell number on it. But the long and short of it, you are making rounds, you’re pulling the inmate in and out of his cell, you’re keying, because —¶
MR. : Now, are you talking about bed book count, or are you talking about, like, actual rounds?¶
MS. : No. You’re making rounds. Not a bed count. If you actually did it, if a bed book was done, between those days, then whoever did the bed book would most definitely know¶
EFTA00110154¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
154¶
EFTA00110155¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
155¶
MS. : No. It wasn’t. It wasn’t done prior to. Now, if you are making, TruScope, the officers have a log that they do. Any activity is part of whatever is going on in your unit. That should have -. That could have been logged. But is there a requirement that said that you have to log that, that you did the bed book count? You would be doing it, you know, for documentation purposes. But a lieutenant or a staff member can do a bed book count, just to make sure that things are done accurate. So, that’s not -. It’s not something that was a requirement prior to.¶
MR. — aside from the bed book count, though, is there any other way, though, and you said when they were conducting rounds. I mean, when a staff member is conducting rounds, are they supposed to be walking around with the, you know, Sentry report, or BOP roster, or whatever it is, the housing roster that indicates what cell he is¶
EFTA00110156¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
156¶
assigned to in the system?¶
MS. : No. They don’t have to have the roster. However, once the inmate is introduced into SHU, typically, the OIC does a lot of the data entry. So, someone, even if it’s not the OIC, if someone in SHU, if someone is doing the data entry, they are the ones that is physically recording where the inmates is. No one else would know where that inmate was assigned unless they actually go in the system and do the Sentry assignment. So —¶
MS. : — the person that is saying, okay, if I am saying put inmate X, Y, and in cell ten, I have to change him from wherever he was before, and make sure that I update, I update it. And not only that, there is a physical board in SHU that you have the cards. You have name tags or whatever. And it shows where everyone is.¶
MR. : And does it say where they are based upon them writing it down from knowing that they are in there, or is that showing where they are based upon what the BOP system says?¶
EFTA00110157¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110158¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
158¶
what happened, how it was done, where the discrepancy came in place. So, I guess my question, though, is: between - and so, I know that the person who dropped, you know, basically dropped the ball by not making the correct entry on the 30th, but the fact that from the 30th all the way to the 10th —¶
MS. : Mm-hmm.¶
MR. : — this, you know, discrepancy continued, my question to you is, is there any point, aside from when he was physically placed in the wrong cell, and the key entry wasn’t, you know, updated, or not in the wrong cell, but they key entry wasn’t updated. Was there any way that that would have been caught in those approximately ten days? After that initial mistake happened. So, like, an audit of the system —¶
MS. : — or, like, hey, let’s, you know, aside from a bed book count, how do we know that these inmates are actually in the cells that they are supposed to be assigned, you know, or they are in the cells that they are assigned in, in the system? Is there a¶
EFTA00110159¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
159¶
EFTA00110160¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110161¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110162¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
162¶
MS. : — no. I wouldn’t say who, because the folks that actually do the, that do the rounds, they are physically, you know, doing the manual labor. And typically, the SHU OIC, because there is not, like, five computers up in SHU. There may be one or two computers in SHU. And typically, the OIC is the one that is logged in. And that person is doing all the administrative work. So, they would ensure that, okay, rounds are done. And if there were bar taps, or like you said, if there were cell searches done, that information is then communicated from one officer to the OIC, and then that person goes in and records that it’s done.¶
EFTA00110163¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110164¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
164¶
MR. : — or PIN and pack, or however, which way you say it, what, what could have or should have happened, if you wanted to allow someone to take a - make a telephone call?¶
MS. : They don’t make one. There is allowances for, like, the (Indiscernible *02:32:44) phone calls. That would be done by the Chaplin, but that, too, is on a recorded line. And that is in the Chaplin area. The other thing is a legal phone call, and that would be on an unmonitored line. But that would only be for legal purposes.¶
MR. : Now, is it true, though, if it was allowed to be done on a legal line, if it was authorized by, you know, the captain or whomever, or the case manager, unit manager, should it be put on speaker phone, and monitored by a staff member?¶
MS. : Policy says - I don’t know but policy says that the inmates should make phone calls, and it should be through the ITS system.¶
EFTA00110165¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110166¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110167¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
167¶
EFTA00110168¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
168¶
EFTA00110169¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110170¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
170¶
MR. : — I’m just going to ask you just a couple more questions, then we will be done.¶
MR. It says, “6:33 a.m., on August 10th, 2019, a body alarm is activated in the Special Housing Unit. SHU staff reported inmate Epstein was unresponsive in cell,” and it says the cell, but it says Sentry does not reflect this accurately. “Staff entered the cell and attempted to wake inmate Epstein. Control center announced a medical emergency, and CPR was initiated.” So, the information that we have is that 6:33, Thomas told Noel, call in the emergency, and Thomas went straight into the cell. Did Thomas act appropriately by going straight into the cell, or should he have waited for someone to arrive?¶
MS. : No. There is -. Well, it depends if you feel like you - that is an emergency, and it is a life or death situation. I don’t know if he had the -. He could have gone into -. He could have gone into the cell.¶
MR. : Okay. So, policy doesn’t dictate that you are supposed to wait for other¶
EFTA00110171¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
171¶
MS. : There is no -. When you say policy, policy does state that you have to be safe, and that you should wait for another staff to arrive. Policy does say that. If Thomas felt that he had enough staff on hand, I don’t know if he felt that, but policy does say to ensure. And especially if you have more than one inmate in a cell. So, with, I guess Thomas realized there was only one inmate in the cell, and if he saw the inmate hanging, he would probably want to act immediately. But policy protects you either way. If you feel that you have enough, because - and that’s your - that’s what I said - that’s your discernment. If you feel that you have enough people on, you know, available, maybe he felt that way.¶
MR. : Okay. And then, it says, “At 7:36 a.m., inmate Epstein pronounced dead by the emergency room physician.” Do you know of anything about -? Do you know if Epstein ever shown signs of life, prior to leaving the¶
EFTA00110172¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
172¶
MCC, or specifically from 6:33 a.m. to 7:36 a.m., do you know if he showed any kind of signs of movement or life?¶
MS. : No. I don’t. I arrived after. And I have never heard of anything to the contrary that he exhibited life.¶
MR. Okay. And here is another thing that was written in there, in the BOP, and again, this is the BOP after-action report. It says, “SHU has multiple cells equipped with video recording capability.¶
Inmate Epstein was not housed in one of these cells, and there appears to be no set guidance on when to utilize these cells.” So specifically, I am assuming he is, they are either talking about 10 South or possibly G-tier. I’m not sure. I can’t remember if G-tier has cameras or not. But 10 South certainly does.¶
MR. : Do you believe that Epstein should have been placed in one of those cells that were, that had cameras in them?¶
MS. : I’m not going to say that. I’m not going to say that he should have been¶
EFTA00110173¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
173¶
placed in a cell with a camera. He was an -. He is an inmate, just like another inmate. So, I can’t, I can’t say that, that he should have definitely been placed in a cell. There obviously was a reason that they felt that he was safe, since he didn’t say that he was going to -. I don’t -. Yeah. I can’t say that he should have definitely been placed in a cell with a camera.¶
MS. : Because those cells are for the SAMs inmates. Those inmates that can’t, you know, their communication has to be monitored. So, that is a different vetting process.¶
MR. : And do you -. These are going to be the last, like, three or four questions. Oh. What do you believe allowed Epstein to be able to - if he took his own life - what do you believe allowed Epstein to take his own life?¶
MS. : Well, there were, I think his, if that’s what he wanted to do, without - because the -. Now, we do know that staff¶
EFTA00110174¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
174¶
members have to make rounds. They’re going to, every, I don’t know, 30 minutes, a regular round. But he could have done it right before, or right after the round. So, it doesn’t mean that he still - at the end - still wouldn’t have happened. So, I can’t say for certain that, we still would not have had the same outcome.¶
So, I can’t -. I know there was some things that staff did not do that they were supposed to do. Had they still made their rounds, there is a possibility that a death could have still have occurred, because there are instances where staff make their rounds, and inmates still are able to successfully complete suicide, unfortunately. So, in this instance, staff - we all, again, know - staff did not do what they were, you know, supposed to do by policy, but I can’t say with certainty that he still would not have been able to successfully complete suicide.¶
MR. : So, it sounds like rounds would have helped. What about having a cellmate? Do you think that would have helped?¶
MS. : Yes. A cellmate would have¶
EFTA00110175¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
175¶
been able to alert a staff member, that is, if they were alert and oriented themselves.¶
MR. : Yeah. I would think, though, if a cellmate was in there, and they saw someone hanging themselves, you know, obviously, there would be no requirement, I guess, for them to do it, but that would certainly indicate to that person that they probably, there was an issue. Right?¶
MS. : Yeah. But when you say that, when you say that, it depends on, see, if the manner in which he committed suicide, he did it because he was in there by himself. Yes.¶
MS. : But there is instances where you have cellmates, if you are on, you could have - an inmate could have tied a ligature around his neck, if he was in his bed, and just hung himself that way. So, again, there are things that were not done on line with policy, but I can’t say for certain because we have, we do have successful suicides, where staff do follow procedure and follow policy.¶
MR. : But in this case, I guess, you know, you know, correct me if I’m¶
EFTA00110176¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
176¶
wrong, but I would think that the two most glaring things were the fact that he was required to have a cellmate, and he didn’t; and that, also, staff were not conducting rounds as they were required. Would you agree with that assessment?¶
MS. : Yeah. We know that those things did not happen.¶
MR. : And do you believe anything else, you know, basically, if we are looking at what all, you know, what could have helped prevent this from happening in the future? If we are looking at it as, you know, like, well, what can we do better next time?¶
Aside from making sure, you know, cellmates that are required to have cellmates have them, and then, aside from making sure that staff are actually conducting their rounds and counts, is there anything else that should have been done?¶
MS. : Just —¶
MR. : It sounds like you didn’t agree with putting him in a cell with a camera.¶
So, I’m just wondering if there is anything else that —¶
MS. : No. I’m not saying necessarily¶
EFTA00110177¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
177¶
EFTA00110178¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
178¶
Epstein to die?¶
MS. : I don’t believe that the BOP is responsible for him committing suicide. I believe that, as you investigate, that there are things that - no, none with the policy, but I don’t believe that that contributed to the suicide itself. Because, like I said, I know we are looking at it after, like, Monday morning quarterbacking, but there are, there are some instances where there is a successful suicide, where does not follow protocol from top to bottom. And it happens, unfortunately. And in this instance, they didn’t do everything that they were supposed to do, or they didn’t do a lot, but I don’t believe that it contributed to him committing suicide. I don’t. I don’t really believe that.¶
MR. : So, you don’t believe - and we didn’t get into staff members sleeping - but you don’t believe that a staff member not conducting rounds, a staff member sleeping on the job, a staff members not, you know, making proper notifications and getting a new cellmate into them, you don’t believe that that is contributed to him taking his own life?¶
EFTA00110179¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
179¶
EFTA00110180¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
180¶
performance failure, because it seems to me that there was a lot of job performance failure here, at the very least, in the sense that people weren’t doing their jobs.¶
MR. : And that, that helped cause, you know, and again, I think you mentioned it, if a person wants to kill themselves, they’re probably going to be able to find a way. But there is also things that, when an inmate is in our custody, it is our job to try to do everything we can to keep them alive, and prevent that from happening.¶
MR. : So, my question to you is, you don’t believe that, by though, you know, them not doing those things, that that helped contribute?¶
MS. : And I know this might sound - but you sound bewildered by my response, but I believe that it contributed to some failures, but I don’t really believe that the failure equals the contribution of the suicide. I really don’t believe that.¶
MR. : Okay. Yeah. I don’t¶
EFTA00110181¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
181¶
EFTA00110182¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
EFTA00110183¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
183¶
(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter went off the record and back on the record).¶
MR. This is Senior Special Agent It is currently 1:26 p.m., 12/02/2021. Prior to hanging up the call, Associate Warden asked if I could turn back on the recorder so she could make a clarifying statement. So, Ms. go ahead. I’ll just remind you, you are under oath, and this is a voluntary interview.¶
MS. : I wanted to clarify whether I filled that, some of the things helped, I guess helped to, or contributed to, Epstein’s ability to commit suicide. While I understand that this is something that no one wanted, there were things that were not done, that were in line with policy. That were required to be done, and had those things been done, maybe we would not be questioning the liability aspect. But I just want to ensure that it’s understood that I have - I believe that that’s should follow policy, to ensure with certainty that no¶
EFTA00110184¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
184¶
inmate is able to hurt themselves, or that no other inmate is able to hurt them.¶
So, with that knowledge, again, I really hope that staff would have done everything within their power to follow policy, so that there would be no question as to what should or should not have been done. And with acknowledgement that there were not things done that should have been done, as it relates to following policy.¶
MR. : All right. Thank you very much. Is there anything else you wanted to add before I turn off the recorder and we end this interview?¶
MS. : No. I think that’s it. I just wanted to add that as a sentiment, that I understand that this is a serious matter, and that it required care and attention, and that it requires me to clarify what I believe actually, you know, the staff did or did not do.¶
MR. : Perfect. Thank you so much. Again, if there is anything you need from me, you have my email, and I will greatly look forward to the information you can provide¶
EFTA00110185¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
185¶
EFTA00110186¶
LIMITED OFFICIAL USE¶
186¶
CERTIFICATE¶
I hereby certify that the foregoing pages represent an accurate transcript of the electronic sound recording of the proceedings before the Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General in the matter of:¶
Interview of¶
Brianna Rose Burton, Transcriber¶
EFTA00110187¶