7-1 LIMS (Rev. 10-2-17) UNCLASSIFIED 2501 Investigation Parkway Quantico, Virginia 22135 FBI Laboratory 4940 Fowler Road Huntsville, Alabama 35898 # LABORATORY REPORT To: SPECIAL AGENT New York Date: September 9, 2020 Case ID No.: NY-3151227 Lab No.: 2020-01577-1 Communication(s): July 31, 2020 Agency Reference(s): Subject(s): | Victim(s): | Jeffrey Epstein | | :--- | :--- | Discipline(s): Questioned Documents FBI Laboratory Evidence Designator(s): Item 1 Electronic images of greeting card bearing handwriting Item 2 Electronic image of envelope addressed to "Larry Nassar" Item 3 Various documents submitted as bearing the purported known writing of Jeffrey Epstein (E6516238, 1B39) | Item 4 | Envelope addressed to "Larry Nassar" (1A65) | | :--- | :--- | Item 5 Greeting card bearing writing "...Dear L.N. As you..." (1A65) Item 6 Questioned Documents Secondary Evidence (4 ESDA lifts) This report contains the results of the questioned document examinations. ## Results of Examinations: Meaningful handwriting comparisons could not be conducted between questioned Items 4 and 5 and Item 3, the purported known writing of JEFFREY EPSTEIN, due to the lack of verified known writing submitted for comparison that is comparable in style, wording, and format to the questioned items. Enclosures (2) Page 1 of 4 UNCLASSIFIED SDNY_00017986 - Lab Report-Released-(85848).pdf EFTA00141080 UNCLASSIFIED If future handwriting examinations are desired, verified undictated known writing should be obtained from EPSTEIN, Item 3. Dictated and undictated known writing should be obtained from any other logical suspect(s). The known writing should be a mixture of handwriting (cursive) and hand printing comparable to the questioned items in wording and format. Dictated known writing should be obtained on separate envelopes and cards similar in size to the questioned items, and each repetition should be removed from the writer’s view upon completion. Numerous repetitions may be necessary in order to obtain naturally prepared writing. Undictated known writing consists of writing prepared during normal course of business activity. Possible sources of undictated known writing include business papers, letters, canceled checks, and/or applications. It should be noted that the torn edges of the Item 3 pages beginning "AutHoR.. DONALD..." and "JHONNY CONTReRAS..." were at one time attached. Indented writing of unknown value was observed on three pages of Item 3. The Electrostatic Detection Apparatus (ESDA) lifts, used to visualize and retain the indented writing, have been designated Item 6 and are considered secondary evidence. Two images representative of the indented writing observed are enclosed for your investigative assistance. No other indented writing of value was observed on the remaining pages of Item 3 or Items 4 and 5, using side-lighting and/or the ESDA. The sealing flap of Item 4 was manufactured to be moisture-activated. The stamp affixed to Item 4 is a self-adhesive, booklet-type stamp. The edges of this stamp are suitable for future cut edge examinations. If such examinations are desired, comparable known stamps should be submitted to this Laboratory. It will be necessary to resubmit the original questioned item at that time. Additional assessments and observations have been made and recorded for possible future examinations. ## Torn/Cut Edge Methodology: The methodology utilized when conducting a torn/cut edge examination involves a fourstage process. 1) Analysis: The first stage is the visual examination of the items to be compared using lighting and magnification sufficient to allow fine detail to be distinguished, and the notation of their physical properties in the examination documentation. Some of the characteristics that can be observed include: - Type of paper/material - Dimensions - Color Page 2 of 4 2020-01577-1 UNCLASSIFIED SDNY_00017987 - Lab Report-Released-(85848).pdf EFTA00141081 ## UNCLASSIFIED - Relative spacing of components (space between lines, perforations, etc.) - Markings such as printing and/or writing - Edge characteristics such as feathering and/or fracture patterns 2) Comparison: The second stage is the side-by-side comparison of the items to assess the class and/or individual characteristics. 3) Evaluation: The third stage is the formulation of an opinion based on any similarities, differences, and limitations, if present. The range of opinions that can be reached is as follows: - May Have Been at one time attached - A less than definite determination that the items were at one time attached. There is a correspondence between the item(s); however, there is limited agreement in identifying characteristics and limitations are present. This opinion requires explanation of the limiting factors. - - May Not Have Been at one time attached – A less than definite determination that the items were not at one time attached. There is a lack of correspondence in characteristics between the items and some inconsistencies are noted; however, limitations are present. This opinion requires explanation of the limiting factors. Page 3 of 4 2020-01577-1 UNCLASSIFIED SDNY_00017988 - Lab Report-Released-(85848).pdf EFTA00141082 ## UNCLASSIFIED - The torn/cut items were not at one time attached - The torn/cut items were not at one time directly attached due to sufficient disagreement in class and/or individualizing characteristics. 4) Verification: The final stage of the examination process is the verification. This stage of the process is performed to ensure the appropriate examinations have been conducted, the examiner's conclusions are accurate and consistent with technical notes and are within the limits of the discipline, there is supporting data, and all records conform to Laboratory standards. ## Limitations: The following factors that can affect the examination process and/or the results rendered include: - Insufficient quantity of original material - Poor condition of the edges - Prior destructive examinations such as latent print processing - Lack of sufficient suitable characteristics for comparison ## Remarks: No examinations were conducted on Items 1 and 2 since these were electronic images of original Items 4 and 5. For questions about the content of this report, please contact Forensic Examiner at . Items 1 and 2 are electronic evidence and are being retained. The remaining evidence, which includes secondary evidence, will be returned under separate cover. This report contains the opinions and interpretations of the issuing examiner(s) and is supported by records retained in the FBI Laboratory files. Please allow a minimum of thirty days from the date of a discovery request for the FBI Laboratory to provide the related materials. The FBI cannot ensure timely delivery of discovery requests received in less time. The work described in this report was conducted at the Quantico Laboratory. Questioned Documents Unit Page 4 of 4 2020-01577-1 UNCLASSIFIED - Lab Report-Released-(85848).pdf SDNY_00017989 EFTA00141083 2020-01577 UNCLASSIFIED Enclosures Item 6: ESDA lift from Item 3 Page bearing “...AIR..." Back, Lift #1 Red boxes denote indented writing of unknown value Blue box denotes possible indented writing but which lacks legibility UNCLASSIFIED 1 of 2 * 2020-01577 Enclosures.pdf* SDNY_00017990 EFTA00141084 UNCLASSIFIED - 2020-01577 Enclosures.pdf SDNY_00017991 EFTA00141085