From:

To:

Subject: Fwd: Epstein search warrant documents

Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 17:13:56 +0000

Could ou lease give me a call when you have a moment? Not an emergency but when you have a chance. I'm at . Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Epstein search warrant documents (from surrounding text) |
| From | [redacted] (black box) |
| Date | May 12, 2020 at 13:02:53 EDT |
| To | One or more recipients — all redacted (quoted display names with angle-bracketed addresses visible but blacked out) |
| Cc | One or more recipients — all redacted (black boxes over names/addresses) |

Subject: Re: Epstein search warrant documents



Just to be clear. The US Attorney's Office (or it's contractors) are not "processing" anything. You are taking files that I will be extracting from processed evidence and putting them into an E-Discovery tool (Relativity) to do a taint review.

Relativity is NOT a forensic tool. It is incapable of dealing with many things that are found forensically on a
computer like free space, slack space, and system files to name a few. When we started this, and you insisted
you do the taint review in Relativity, I warned you that it was adding months worth of work on top of what
was already done, and that Relativity was incapable of viewing everything. You insisted we do it this way. So
now and I have come up with a way to fit this round peg into this square hole. We will get it done. [ ]

Sorry it has taken so long, but we are talking about terabytes worth of data over multiple forms of digital evidence. Phones, tablets, loose media, cameras, DVRs, servers, laptops, and desktop computers. We have gotten past encryption on multiple devices. When we review devices on such large cases, we usually do it piece by piece as things are processed, I was unaware that you didn't want to review as things were processed, that you wanted to do it "all at once", so that added to the delay. Sorry for that. Just a differentiation of methodology I suppose.

and I feel confident that the method we have come up with will be more consistent and preserve the attribution of files to devices and links of e-mails to attachments that the load file generation that I did a while back was lacking.



EFTA00025798

Email Header Information:

| Field      | Value                                        |
|------------|----------------------------------------------|
| From       | [Redacted]                                   |
| Sent       | Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:33 AM               |
| To         | [Redacted]                                   |
| Cc         | [Redacted], [Redacted]                        |
| Subject    | RE: Epstein search warrant documents         |


Okay, so just to check, you both think that there is not a need to do a test run? You're both comfortable with just basically sending us copies of everything? I don't totally understand why we couldn't have done that eight months ago, but regardless of the passage of time, I want to make sure we understand so we can report to our supervisors. I assume that means that we (at the U.S. Attorney's Office and through contractors) will therefore need to do all the processing ourselves, correct? And thanks again to you both.

- Date/Time: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:30
- Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents
- From: [redacted]
- To: [redacted]; [redacted]
- Cc: [redacted]; [redacted]; [redacted]

Email body:
- "Okay, so just to check, you both think that there is not a need to do a test run? You're both comfortable with just basically sending us copies of everything? I don't totally understand why we couldn't have done that eight months ago, but regardless of the passage of time, I want to make sure we understand so we can report to our supervisors. I assume that means that we (at the U.S. Attorney's Office and through contractors) will therefore need to do all the processing ourselves, correct? And thanks again to you both."

- "Like said in his earlier email. It will be the raw data and it will be marked so it is easier to attribute it to a [ ] particular device. Problem now is how to get the data to since he is teleworking."

Like said in his earlier email. It will be the raw data and it will be marked so it is easier to attribute it to a [ ]
particular device. Problem now is how to get the data to since he is teleworking.

cell
desk

On May 12, 2020 11:15 AM,
"<empty>")" <<empty>> wrote:
I have no doubt you do, but can you please tell us what that plan is? Thanks!

- From: [redacted]
- Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:11
- To: [redacted]; [redacted] (multiple recipients, redacted)
- Cc: [redacted]; [redacted] (multiple recipients, redacted)
- Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents

I will use the spreadsheet, no problem.
[ ] and I ironed out all the details. We've got a good plan moving forward that will meet your needs.

cell
desk

On May 12, 2020 10:34 AM,' < > wrote:
it would be very helpful for us if you could please use the attached spreadsheet in transmitting that info so we
make sure we get all the info we need. I think you had previously sent us a list of certain information that unfortunately

EFTA00025799

wasn't helpful for us, so we want to make sure we're all on the same page.

In terms of data transfer, are you just sending a literal copy of all the raw data, and we'll process and upload it on our end? I ask to make sure we don't lose any searchability — when FBI sent versions before, it had already been processed. I think what we talked about on the phone a month ago was getting, for example, data from one device to make sure it transfers correctly, before sending over literally everything — is that still the plan?

thanks,

Key information from the email header:

*   **Sent:** Tuesday, May 12, 2020 10:27
*   **Subject:** RE: Epstein search warrant documents
*   The "From", "To", and "Cc" fields are redacted.

Hello

Me and just finished our phone call regarding the data. will put together a list of the all of the data and where the data was collected. I will work to send some hard drives to so he can begin to copy the data and send it to us. I will need to figure out a way to get the data off of the hard drives.

Please let us know if there are any questions.

Thank you.



The image is an email header with redacted sender and recipient information.
*   **From:** [Redacted]
*   **Sent:** Friday, May 8, 2020 2:15 PM
*   **To:** [Redacted] (USANYS), [Redacted](USANYS)
*   **Cc:** [Redacted], [Redacted], [Redacted]

Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents

Okay thanks — please do let us know if at any point that changes, otherwise we'll look forward to being able to review the returns in early June. Thanks again.

This is an email header with redactions. 
*   **From:** [Redacted]
*   **Sent:** Friday, May 08, 2020 14:14
*   **To:** [Redacted] (USANYS), [Redacted] (USANYS)
*   **Cc:** [Redacted]
*   **Subject:** RE: Epstein search warrant documents

Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents

There has been talk of us returning to normal soon, so I don't think it will effect the timeline I initially gave you. If it does, I'll let you know.

EFTA00025800

cell
desk

On May 8, 2020 1:58 PM, " < > wrote:

Understood, thanks—it will be great to get that list on Thursday. As a refresh, the info we are looking for is in the attached spreadsheet template.

On the returns themselves, do the changes you mentioned mean that the estimate of a month from now for complete transmission of the search warrant returns is no longer likely? If so could you please let us know what the current estimate would be, so we can factor that in? Thanks very much.

Email Details:

*   **From:** [Redacted]
*   **Sent:** Friday, May 08, 2020 13:50
*   **To:** [Redacted] (USANYS)
*   **Cc:** [Redacted] (USANYS), [Redacted]

Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents

Sony for the delay, they reduced us to 1 day a week, so things have been stretched out by a factor of 5. I will be back in the office on Thursday and will be able to get you the list then as I have to access some of our systems to do so.

Key information:

*   Contact information (blacked out)
*   Contact options: cell, desk

On May 8, 2020 12:10 PM, wrote:

Following up on the below, I think you had said you expected to be able to get us a list of the devices seized from the search warrants at Epstein's residences in New York and the USVI, as well as from his person upon arrest, in about a month (during our conference call a month ago) — so wanted to check if we can still expect that very soon? We're waiting on that list to be able to do an updated search warrant on all of those devices. Please let us know the current timeline — and also the current timeline on producing the results from those August and September searches? I think you and were going to coordinate on that, and you had mentioned you expected we'd have it a couple months from our call, which would be about a month from now. Wanted to make sure we're still on track.

thanks,



From: 
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2020 15:27

EFTA00025801

- Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents
- Header lines: "To:" and "Cc:"
- Multiple recipient and CC entries present but fully redacted (black boxes)
- Some entries include the visible tag "(USANYS)" next to redacted addresses
- Email formatting visible: angle brackets around addresses and semicolons separating recipients
- No unredacted names or email addresses visible

Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents

Ok let's plan on 11am tomorrow morning, I am trying to get an FBI line with a larger capacity but I won't know until tomorrow am. I will push it out when confirmed. Thanks

| Field | Extracted content |
|---|---|
| From | [REDACTED] (mailto:[REDACTED]) |
| Sent | Tuesday, April 07, 2020 3:15 PM |
| To | Multiple recipients (names/emails redacted). Two recipients annotated “(USANYS)”. |
| Cc | Multiple recipients (names/emails redacted) |
| Subject | RE: Epstein search warrant documents |

- Several recipient addresses/names are fully redacted (black bars).
- Visible annotations: “(USANYS)” appears for at least two recipients.

Yes, I can do anytime tomorrow, and can also join anytime tomorrow. So whenever is good on your end.

Also, we can host a conference call, but only up to six lines at a time — so if FBI has larger capacity than that let us know, otherwise I'd propose we do:

Key information from the image:

*   **From:** [Redacted]
*   **Sent:** Tuesday, April 07, 2020 14:13
*   **To:** [Redacted] (USANYS)
*   **Cc:** [Redacted], [Redacted] (USANYS), [Redacted]
*   **Subject:** RE: Epstein search warrant documents
*   The sender asks if the recipient is available for a conference call the next day.
*   Email exchange on April 7, 2020.

EFTA00025802

Following up on this from a month ago — I know we're living in a different world than what existed four weeks ago, but are you at all able to assist while working remotely? This has been pending for almost two months and we still don't have a very basic list of each device or item that was seized and searched, or for which of those we've received materials. We're happy to have a call if that would be useful, but as a first step the most basic thing we're looking for is the info in the template spreadsheet we sent earlier (that's also attached).

thanks,

The image is an email.

*   **From:** \[Blacked out]
*   **Sent:** Monday, March 09, 2020 12:00
*   **To:** \[Blacked out] (USANYS)
*   **CC:** \[Blacked out]
*   **Subject:** RE: Epstein search warrant documents



Unfortunately I don't think this is very helpful to us. Did you take a look at the example spreadsheet I sent on 2/24? The excel file you sent has descriptions that don't match up to the items listed in the search warrant returns (that we sent on 2/23), and we don't have the 1B or CART numbers to be able to cross-reference. We also can't tell what you mean by "loose media" without a specific comparison to what was seized, we don't know which items you're referring to as "Windows machines," and we can't tell whether the entirety of any particular item has been transferred, or just partial. For example, it looks like we have gotten very, very few image files, which is surprising.

We have also encountered some very significant problems in trying to review the more than 1 million documents we recently received:

	- The data we've received has no way to put any emails and attachments together. So if an email says, "see the attached flight records," for example, we have no way of linking that up with the records themselves. Not only is that a big problem for us in review, it's going to be a huge problem for producing the documents to defense counsel.

	- The load file has no link to the native file, so when we load the data to the database, there's no way to have the native files show up in the database. Because many of the files are too large to open in the viewer, it effectively means that there are many files that are completely invisible to us.

- Related, the control numbers in the load file don't match up to the native files. So we have two sets of numbers and no way to match up anything—that is, even if we were to try to go hunt down every individual large file in the native files, it would be impossible.

So the data that we most recently got, we need to get in a form that addresses those issues, and we likely will need to get a similar reproduction of the data we received a couple months ago. Otherwise we're sifting through more than a million documents without much rhyme or reason.

I've re-attached the spreadsheet we sent last week — I think that's a good place to start in terms of our necessary recordkeeping, and we need that info at the very least, as well as anything else you think would be useful. Also attaching the SW returns for reference. And again, we're happy to meet up anytime and hash all this out in person if that's useful.

thanks,



EFTA00025803

This is an email header with redacted information.

*   **From:** \[Redacted]
*   **Sent:** Wednesday, March 04, 2020 16:36
*   **To:** \[Redacted] (USANYS)
*   **Cc:** \[Redacted]

Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents

Here is a listing of what I have already handed over in load files to the US Attorney's Office for taint review. Some points of clarification: There were 9 IDE hard drives found in the Manhattan apartment, they turned out to be 3 copies of 3 drives (9 drives in total) from a July 2007 search on one of his properties. I only processed 3 (as they were all copies). All the loose media from the NY apartment is included. All the Windows machines from the NY apartment are included. Only 2 Macs from NY and 1 from the Island are included.

I will have to more closely coordinate with whoever is loading up Relativity with the remaining Macs as the tool they have to be processed with does not easily re-name the load files.

Spreadsheet is attached.

Key entities in the image include the sender and recipients of an email sent on March 3, 2020, at 12:25 PM. The subject of the email is "RE: Epstein search warrant documents." Contact information, including office and cell numbers, are also listed.

I could do Thursday morning, but I think it would be helpful for us to get the accounting in advance of the meeting so we can figure out in advance what (if any) additional steps we need — is that possible?

- Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents
- From: [redacted]
- Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2020 09:59
- To: Multiple recipients (addresses redacted); at least one recipient shown as “(USANYS)”
- Cc: Multiple recipients (addresses redacted)
- Notes: Email header screenshot with heavy redaction of names and addresses.

Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents

Can we do Thursday morning? My network should be back by then and I can give you a good accounting.

EFTA00025804

cell
desk

On Mar 2, 2020 11:15 AM,

>

wrote:

Doing the weekly check in on this — is there a time this week when everyone can meet on this?

thanks,



Key information from the image:

*   **From:** [Redacted]
*   **Sent:** Monday, February 24, 2020 17:38
*   **To:** [Redacted] (USANYS)
*   **CC:** [Redacted] (USANYS), [Redacted]

Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents



Totally understand about the network issues—we can relate. I do still think it will be helpful to all sit down together to have an in-person discussion, to make sure everybody is on the same page. Are folks available for that next week? And what I think would be most helpful to facilitate that would be a spreadsheet of each separate device referenced in the two search warrant returns, with columns for whether we've dumped the contents, whether they've been reviewed and/ortransferred, what portions were transferred, etc.

Something roughly like the attached, with any other categories you think would be useful — and the info on the attached is mostly hypothetical, obviously, just as examples. That will help us fully understand what's been reviewed, transferred, and received so far, and what remains.

(Also just on the pictures, we do want copies of those as well, please including from the discs and the devices — I think FBI was going to do an initial screen to make sure no CP, and since I think the answer was no, we'll need to get those to be able to review them as well.)

many thanks,



The image is an email header with redacted fields. Key entities include the sender (From), recipients (To), carbon copy recipients (Cc), and the date/time the email was sent (February 24, 2020, 09:24). "USANYS" appears in the recipient field.

Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents



Sony for the delayed response. They are tearing out our old network and giving us a new one, they mandated we delete old stuff (about 400 TB worth). Now that they are working on replacing the network, we can do only local work. I should be able to give you an accounting of what is what. I can say, off the top of my head, that all windows based items from the NY search have been handed over as well as all loose media. The CDs from NY only contained pictures, no documents. There are still some Apple items from NY that need to be produced. As far as the Island stuff goes, the 1st item on your spreadsheet, the "kitchen" mac has been produced. Still working on the rest.

EFTA00025805

cell
desk

On Feb 23, 2020 12:21 AM, wrote:
Team,

Following up on the below from last weekend, I'm still not sure how we're addressing this so I thought it would make sense for us to all schedule a (hopefully relatively brief) meeting to all get on the same page? We didn't hear back on which files had previously been provided, but our tech folks did their best to differentiate, and we got access to the materials yesterday and its well over a million documents, and we don't have any idea what we're looking at — i.e., which devices the materials came from, whether it's full or partial results, how many more devices we have coming, etc.

Based on the attached search warrant returns, it looks like from the New York mansion (the PDF) there are approximately 40 devices that would have storage (computers, hard drives, thumb drives, etc.) and that's not even counting at least 60+ CDs. And then from the Virgin Islands (the Excel spreadsheet), at least more than 25 devices, including multiple servers / server racks.

So we gotta know what we've already received, what remains, anticipated schedule, etc, and I know it's a lot of moving pieces on all sides so wanted to loop in everybody at once. The case team will be in California this coming week from Tuesday through Friday, but then I think generally around the first week of March, which will hopefully be plenty of time to schedule a productive meeting.

thanks all,



- From: [redacted]
- Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2020 16:30
- To: [redacted]; [redacted]
- Cc: [redacted]; [redacted]; [redacted]; [redacted]
- Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents



I'm not sure who's the exact right person to ask this, so wanted to get everybody on one email chain about it — I have the hard drive that dropped off that has new Epstein search warrant materials, but it looks like there are also old materials (that I think we had previously received and uploaded??) on the hard drive, and so I'm not sure what's new.

Just generally, and and I talked about this last week too, but it's basically impossible for us to keep track of what we're getting, and what has been completed, without some kind of identification or labeling system, along with a list of which devices have been extracted and downloaded.

So for example on the hard drive currently, there are 38 folders labeled "loadFiles" through "37loadFiles" with a modified date of 11/14/19, which I think we may have already previously received — but I'm not sure, because we haven't gotten any info on which folders match up to which devices, etc. And then there's another folder titled "NYCO24362" that has a modified date of 1/27/20, so I think that may be the materials we hadn't previously received? That folder by itself has more than 600,000 items.

EFTA00025806

I don't want to give anything that we've already previously received and uploaded, and I can't tell from the folder [ ]
or file names whether everything on the drive is new, or whether just additional materials were saved onto it in addition
to what we already have. =, are you able to give us some guidance on this? Ultimately what we really need is a
spreadsheet of every device, whether it's been dumped (or partially dumped), and then identifying that same info —
which device, and what materials from it — are being given to us with each data transfer. Otherwise I think
organizationally and for review purposes it will be a total disaster for us.

We're happy to have a meeting on this if that's helpful — and thanks everybody for the assistance.

=
Assistant Assistant U.S. Attorney
Southern District of New York Southern

EFTA00025807