EFTA00027701.pdf

Type: pdf
Source set: data-set-8
Extracted text

From: 
(USANYS)"  
 
(USANYS)" •
Subject: RE: Revised MILs and letters 
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 20:36:02 +0000 
OK will do. 
From: 
(USANYS) 
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20214:35 PM 
To: 
(USANYS) A 
Subject: RE: Revised MILs and letters 
> 
Go ahead — I'm not in them. I didn't have comments. And agree with the below. 
From: 
(USANYS) < 
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 4:34 PM 
To: 
(USANYS) 
Subject: RE: Revised MILs and letters 
Here are a few comments on the motion. I looked at the two letters also, and have one suggestion on each (I'm happy to 
propose language in redline, but you may be in the dots) 
1. On the "key" letter — would it be possible to include a sentence on 
pointing to Judge Nathan to whatever 
the article(s) in which she has made comments about Epstein that are far more limited than what she will say in 
court? 
2. On the sealing letter — I think we should add a sentence explaining why we think the claim of Maxwell abuse will 
cause prejudicial publicity. Namely, to air that issue in a public filing when there may well be no good faith basis for 
it would potentially taint the jury pool. 
From: 
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 3:46 PM 
To: 
(USANYS) 
Cc: 
) C a
s; 
Subject: Revised MILs and letters 
Hi 
and 
Attached for your review are: 
1. Revised MILs 
2. A redline 
3. A draft cover letter 
4. A draft index letter with victim information 
Thanks! 
Assistant United States Attorney 
Southern District of New York 
>; 
(USANYS) 
(USANYS) < 
EFTA00027701


New York, New York 10007 
EFTA00027702
Open in the interactive archive →