To: 1S)" < (USANYS)" Subject: RE: Epstein Victim Impact Statements Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 20:19:07 +0000 | think it’s difficult to be that precise, just because we don’t have great visibility into how many (and which) victims each lawyer represents. That said, we have consistently put every victims we’re in touch with (including c/o their lawyers) into the victim contact list, so | think the best and most accurate number would be the 39 from VNS. | can’t recall anybody who we spoke with who would have *not* been on the list at that time, though entirely possible that we were in touch with additional victims through counsel—we spoke to Brad Edwards, Robert Josefsberg, Robbie Kaplan, and Boies Schiller, all of whom have multiple victim clients, some of whom we don’t know the identities of. From: aS (SANS) <a sere Wednesday, October 30, 2019 15:48 To: ES SANS) a <a ; a ! Cc: ES (USANYS) <i Subject: RE: Epstein Victim Impact Statements Team, were the attorneys you or agents spoke to for the same, or different victims? What is fair to represent in terms of we spoke to at least X victims? From: SS (USANYS) <a Wednesday, October 30, 2019 3:32 PM To: A ) <n >; es (SANS) <i ; Ss eS <a Ce: TS (USANYS) <i Subject: RE: Epstein Victim Impact Statements | sent out 39 notices to all the victims listed in VNS. One woman wanted to come and missed her flight the evening before the hearing. | arranged another flight a 6:00AM the morning of the hearing and had a car waiting for her. She missed that flight too. | believe she was either Brad Edwards client or Singrid McCally. | don’t remember her name but can get it she was a no show. Anyone that called and wanted to come was given a round trip ticket car service to and from the airport and hotel. Fro: TS <i > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 1:23 PM To: ES (SANS) <a ; a <a SS) <>; ES (0S. S) < Ce: A (USANYS) <i Subject: RE: Epstein Victim Impact Statements For the first question, the AUSAs contacted the attorneys we were aware of who represented victims to tell them that their clients were welcome to attend and to make a statement. | believe [J also sent out notifications, and hopefully she can tell us how many she sent. EFTA00017905

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

For the second question, based on my review of the transcript (attached), a total of 17 victims were present at the hearing and either spoke at the hearing or had someone read a statement for them. An additional 7 did not attend the hearing but had someone else speak for them or read a statement from them. It is possible there were others present who were not referenced on the record. | don’t think we can answer the third question. | don’t recall anyone off the top of my head who wanted to attend but was unable to, but it’s possible there were some in that position. From: AS (SANYS) <a Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 1:06 PM To: A ) <n >; [nn ) </i>; SS) <>; ES (0S. S) < Cc: AS (USANYS) <i Subject: FW: Epstein Victim Impact Statements Importance: High Are we able to answer these questions for ODAG quickly? | am sure we can answer the second, and maybe the first — not sure about the third. From: a. (OCC) <a Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 12:53 PM To: A (SANS) <a Ce: I (0A C) <i Subject: Epstein Victim Impact Statements Importance: High a. The Petitioner in the Epstein CVRA case has filed an appeal to the | 1'h Circuit. One of their issues is the District Court’s refusal to hold a hearing allowing the Epstein victims to “have their day in court.” The Court’s ruling is, in part, on the basis that a hearing held in SDNY satisfied this request. The Petitioner has alleged that not all of the Epstein victims who wanted to speak were able to do so at the New York hearing because they did not have sufficient notice and were unable to travel to NY. Can your office provide us some details about the following: 1) how many victims were contacted about making a victim impact statement; 2) how many victims were able to travel and make an in-person victim impact statement; and 3) how many victims indicated they wanted to make a victim impact statement but were unable to do so given the notice/timing of the hearing? Please provide as much of this information as possible today. I'm very sorry for the quick turnaround but the Department's response to the mandamus petition is due tomorrow. I really appreciate your assistance. National Coordinator for Child Exploitation Prevention & Interdiction Office of the Deputy Attorney General EFTA00017906