Subject: Fwd: RE: ACTION REQUESTED: Due-outs from DD meeting¶
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 16:38:55 +0000¶
Importance: Normal¶
All,¶
I spoke to □□ and coveyed below. She was going to speak to □ Tovar.¶
Info conveyed to¶
Based on information provided by Tovar and communication with NY, it appears the referenced hard drives by Sweeney were from Epstein’s safe during the first search warrant (related to 305 case) and they did not have authority to seize at the time. When they went back a week later they were missing. The individual who took them brought them to NY. The drives were not encrypted to NY’s knowledge and are currently being processed. NY is also going through the taint process. OTD is not involved.¶
The OTD evidence list provided to the EAD yesterday in the Daily report is strictly the MCC DVR harddrives being processed by OTD (related to 90A case). So the hard drives referenced by Sweeney would not be on that list. Need to confirmed with Tovar that is the list he was referring to.¶
EFTA00161349¶
| Supervisory Special Agent/Forensic Examiner Unit Chief |
| Digital Forensics Analysis Unit |
| Operational Technology Division |
| Federal Bureau of Investigation |
On Aug 20, 2019 11:33 AM, ” > wrote:¶
I will forward to you on red side the evidence tracker sheet provided yesterday by DFAS for the daily report sent to the EAD.¶
On Aug 20, 2019 11:24 AM, “All,¶
This is assuming we are all talking about the same evidence. I don’t have the 1B numbers the EAD was shown to confirm with NY beyond the emails below. If we can get those, we can go further.¶
Fyi, per the NY SSA in charge of the 305 investigation, and confirmed by NYCART FE. Evidence is 2 external hard drives. Drives are not encrypted and already processed by NYCART. Case squad is working through taint review process.¶
Supervisory Special Agent/Forensic Examiner¶
Digital Forensics Analysis Unit¶
Operational Technology Division¶
Federal Bureau of Investigation¶
- Forwarded message ---------
Date: Aug 20, 2019 11:18 AM¶
I tried calling you back, those drives were in his safe during the first search warrant, we did not have the authority to seize them at the time. When we came back a week later they were missing. The individual that took them was contacted and brought them over right away. The drives are not encrypted to my knowledge, they are with Flatley being processed. We are going through the taint process due to the potential for privileged information.¶