Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Date: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 2:28:45 PM From: i (\\) (°°) Sent: Monday, June 01, 2020 16:2 Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Will do. NY CART Coordinator Senior Forensic Examiner cell desk On Jun 1, 2020 4:26 PM, " (USANYS)" > wrote: Unde in touch both on timing and also on there's a categori een produced, or if we'll need to ju the raw data at this stage and go from there From: Es (1) (F81) Sent: Monday, June 01, 2 16 Co: i (Ny) (5S) a: a SANS) a: 3503-026 Page | of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001977 EFTA00157159

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

SS 01'S) a: TE (y) (8) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents =z. Unfortunately, recent events and our staffing levels have conspired to put a kink in just about everything. If we can't make heads or tails of the stuff I've already produced, we'll do it again. They have told us that our staffing levels will be steadily increasing over the next few weeks, but I'm going to have to push back my estimate by a week or 2. Sorry about that. My next day in the office is Thursday, so I'll be able to see if I can easily identify what I already gave you and marry it to a reliable identifier. NY CART Coordinator Senior Forensic Examiner cell desk On Jun 1, 2020 4:13 PM," (USANYS)" > wrote: Thanks for this update ="|| take a look and circle back if any questions 1S 1 from the M 5 email below, the list has Separately, to follo upona questi > still pending to be transferred to | think it’s right that the plan is to repro materials so that we can get them in searchable format, but just wanted to confirm? Currently, we aren’t able to match any of the prior productions to specific devices — so if we’re able to match them up by Bates number no that might work, but otherwise | think it makes sense for us to get everything. But let us know if any issue with that that c of data in the ne don’t think \ be able to start reviewing t week or ytten any updates on that status in the past few weeks, and we’re eager to thanks again, From: i (NY) (Fo!) Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 12:53 0: TS (SANS) <i; a (sans) [Contractor] hii Cc: AE (SANS) i; I (USANYs) < Ci (eS) Subject: Re: Epstein search warrant documents 3503-026 Page 2 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001978 EFTA00157160

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

Updated item descriptions. Just a side note, many thumb drives and SD cards will not have a serial number visible externally, but will report one through our tools. | included those electronically reported serial numbers. Any questions, let me know FBI NY CART Coordinator Senior Examiner Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 4:11 PM ° Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents 3503-026 Page 3 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001979 EFTA00157161

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

From: Es () (F81) < ae Thursday, May 14, 015:54 ey $0 a Ee 2) Subject: Re: Epstein search warrant documents i. Here is The listing of all the evidence gathered in NY that | have. | added some columns to guide you to the unique numbers CART NY uses fro their evidence. The template wasn't a slam dunk over, so | did what | could to convey the information. If you are confused by anything, please let me know. In the column for approximate size, it is in GB, totaled at the bottom and converted to TB. In the materials contained column, | put what load file group the data was transferred over in (Mac, Windows, Loose Media, IDE, or Blacklight) If there is no entry in that column, that data has yet to be transferred. There are 2 Macs and a DVR you don't have as well as an iPhone and an iPad. IF the descriptions are a bit light, let me know and I'll do what | can to beef them up. | will get you the Island stuff tomorrow. FBI NY Senior Examiner Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 12:25 PM T Coordinator 3503-026 Page 4 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001980 EFTA00157162

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

a we) _—_- Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Respectfully, | think there are some miscommunications here — all we have asked is to receive the materials in a format such that we can view them using a system we have access to. We're not able to get web-enabled access through any FBI tool, so we asked for the materials to be transferred in a oadable format so we could put therm on Relativity, which both we and the agents can access. We're required to have the files in a format that we can produce them to defense counsel. | sly been an issue. My understanding from jis that the best way to do it now is just for us (the U.S. Attorney’s Office) to get the original files, which our cone that in many other cases and it hasn’t previou: vendor will process—by which | just mean converting into file formats that are loadable onto to have access to the Relativity. It doesn’t really have anything to do with the taint review—we hav docs in our systems for discovery purposes And we were happy to get the materials as they were processed, but when we received the 1.1 million documents earlier this year, they were in a format that wasn’t usable for the reasons described in the email | sent on March 9. Again, | understand from || that the best way forward s to just get copies of the materials in their original formats, which | understand will be segregated and designated by device. That should work for us! | was just trying to understand the approach, as well as the timeline thanks, From: Ss (\) °°) Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 13:03 10: ES (USNS) i: TT (SANS) [Contractor] (i > Cc: A (USANYS) i ; NS (USANYs) a SS) a; es (\y) ) Subject: Re: Epstein search warrant documents mm Just to be clear. The US Attorney's Office (or it's contractors) are not "processing" anything. You are taking files that | 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, | warned you that it was 3503-026 Page 5 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001981 EFTA00157163

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

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 [i and | 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, | 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 | suppose. HEB and | fee! 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 | did a while back was lacking FBI NY CART Coordinator Senior Examiner From: a (S5\ YS) <a Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:33 AM To: (NY) ()) i: TT (UsANYS) (Contractor se Lts—SCi‘aR Cc: TE (USANS) <i ; a (UsANs) Se —“C;SsCSCSC(‘éaY 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 of comfortable with just basically 1g us copies of everything? | don’t totally understand why we have done that eight months ago, but regardless of the passage of time, | want to make understand so we can report to our supervisors. | ass ff ume that means that we (at the U.S ice and through contractors) will therefore need to do all the processing ourselves, correct? And thanks again to you both From: a (\.) °°); Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:30 70: SEES (USANYS) (Contractor) <i: ; J (USANYS) <i Cc: TE (SANS) i IT (says) as 3503-026 Page 6 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001982 EFTA00157164

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Like J 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. NY CART Coordinator Senior Forensic Examiner cell desk On May (USANYS)" < > wrote: | have no do tell us what that plan is? Thanks! From: i (\\) (°°!) Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:11 (USANYS) <r Cc: AE (USANYS) i; I (USANys) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents I will use the spreadsheet, no problem. [J and I ironed out all the details. We've got a good plan moving forward that will meet your needs. NY CART Coordinator Senior Forensic Examiner cell desk On May 12, 2020 10:34 AM, " a. transmitting that in (USANYS)" t would b ul for us if you could please use the attached spreadshee > we make sure we get all the ir ed. | think you had pr us a list of certain information that unfortunately wasn’t helpful for us, so we want to make sure we’re all on the same page of all the raw data, and we'll chability — when FBI sending a literal cop In terms of data transfer, [J are you jus f ss and upload it on our end? | ask to make sure we don't lc rink what we talked o make sure it tra ons before, it had already been proc 20 was getting, for example, data fro ver literally everything — is that still the plan? 3503-026 Page 7 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001983 EFTA00157165

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

thanks, From: EY (USANYS) [Contractor] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 0 10:27 Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Hello i Me and J just finishe the all of the data and where the data es | so he can begin to copy the data and send it to us. | will need to figure out a way to get the data off of the hard drives 1 our phone call reg will put together a list of arding the data. will work to send some hard « Please let us know if there are any questions Thank you panda May 8, 2020 2:15 PM 0: ES (NY) °°) a ST SANS) a 5) <a (USANYS) <a Cc: EE (SANS) (Contractor) <j: EEE (says) ee es (SANS) > ES (3!) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents do let us know if at any point that changes, otherwise we'll look forward to eview the returns in early June. Thanks again. From: a. (VY) (°3!) Sent: Friday, May 08, 2020 14:14 ——$ aa (USANYS) <a Cc: ES (USANYS) (Contractor) <q: ER (USAnys) ee (SANS) 3503-026 Page 8 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001984 EFTA00157166

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

a SS (8) 5!) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents There has been talk of us returning to normal soon, so | don't think it will effect the timeline I initially gave you. If it does, I'll let you know. NY CART Coordinator Senior Forensic Examiner cell desk On May 8, 2020 1:58 PM, " (USANYS)" < wrote: et that list on Thurs As a refresh, the info we are t template you mentioned mean that the estimate of a month from rch warrant returns is no longer likely? et us know what the current estimate would be can factor that in? Thanks From: Ss (Ny) (8!) Sent: Friday, May 08, 2020 13:50 To: ES (SANS) i; I (SANS) > eS (.)) 6°) <a: (USANYS) <a Cc: EY (SANs) (Contractor) <q; (Usanys) SC F/?/ SS —sd SS (8) (°°) <r Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Sorry for the delay, they reduced us to | 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. Also, ZZ. please reach out to me at one of the numbers below so we can brain storm. Thanks. NY CART Coordinator Senior Forensic Examiner cell desk On May 8, 2020 12:10 PM, ' (USANYS)" > wrote: 3503-026 Page 9 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001985 EFTA00157167

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

u had said \ at Epstein t a month (durin York andt person upon arrest, ina |a month ag 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 t vices. Please let us know the current timeline — and also the curr ults from those August and that, and months from our call, which wou @ about a month from now track timeline on proc »u had mentior ve itaco were going tc gyoue ake sure we're still on thanks From: i. (NY) (3) Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2020 15:27 To: ES (SANS) a; IT (USANys) Cc: EE (USANYS) [Contractor] >; [I (USANYS) (0S) > ES (8) (2) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Zet an FBI line with z )k = plan on 1lar ow until tomorrow am. | will push it out wt 1 tomorr morning, | am trying From: ES (USANYS) (co2{|:c i Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2020 3:15 PM To: a (\\) (5S!) a; (Usanys) (USANYS) <j Cc: NE (USANYS) (Contractor) is; (SNS) a; a -; (USANYS) SS; TS (NY) (S|) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Yes, | can do anytime tomorrow, and ij IJ can also join anytime tomorrow 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 pre 3503-026 Page 10 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001986 EFTA00157168

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

Db ts to join (and if not, one of IS / HD) or Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2020 14:13 To: (USANYS) <i: I (Ny) (FBI) (USANYS) <a ~ Cc: EN (USANYS) (Contractor) i: EN (USANYS) | ee es SAYS) a es) 8) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Are you available tomorrow for a conference call to discuss this issue? ss\ ii i FBI New York On Apr 7, 2020 1:55 PM, " (USANYS)" > wrote: Fallowing up on this from a month ago —|! know \ 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 pendi alme nths and we still don’t h / basic list o e or item that was seized and or for which of those ve re ed materi appy 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, = From: ST (SANS) Sent: Monday, March 09, 2020 12:00 a (3) a (USANYS) 3503-026 Page | 1 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001987 EFTA00157169

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

Cc: EE (USANYS) (Contractor) TT; TT (USANYS) a es °\\') a 8) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Unfortunately | don’t think this is very helpful to us. Did you take a look at the example spreadsheet | 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 —! think that’s a good place to start in terms of our necessary record-keeping, 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, = om: aS (\') (F< 3503-026 Page 12 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001988 EFTA00157170

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

ae Wednesday, March 04, 2020 16:36 SS a (USANYS) <a Cc: ES (USANYS) (Contractor) <q: ER (USAnys) Ss) a ES (8) (5!) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents he US Attorney's Office for taint Here is a listing of what | have already handed over in load files to t DE hard drives found int ives in total) fro clarification: There were 9 > Manhattan tto be 3c points o 2s of 3 drives search on essed 3 (as th a from the NY properties. | only proc y were a 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 with wh | will have to more closely coordina s the tool they have to g up Relativity with the load files remaining Macs processed with does not easily re-name the Spreadsheet is attached NYO CART Coordinator Senior Fore Examiner Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2020 12:25 PM To ES NY) Si) a; IT (sans) a \\) Cc: REE (USANYS) [Contractor] i; Sa (USNS) i: TS : (USANYS) i; TS (NY) (FS!) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents | could do Thursda ning, but | think Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 20 20 09:59 3503-026 Page 13 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001989 EFTA00157171

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

(USANYS) <a Cc: ES (USANYS) (Contractor) <x; ER (SANs) a SS 6520S) . or 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. FP NY CART Coordinator Senior Forensic Examiner cell desk On Mar 2, 2020 11:15 AM, " (USANYS)" < > wrote: Doing the weekly check in on this — is there a time this week when everyone can meet on this? thanks, = From: is (USANYS) Sent: Monday, February 24, 2020 17:38 To (a ; I! (SANs) > es (USANYS) <i Cc: I (USANYS) (Contractor) i ; SR (USANYS) . _____ i C—MYSSC—SC es) 2) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Totally understand about the network issues—we can relate. | do still think it w ave an in- ay is on the same p are that next ek? And w spreadsheet of each separate device referencec vailable t | think would be most helpful to facilitate that would n the two search warrant returns, with columns for whether we’ve dumped the contents, whether they've been reviewed and/or transferred, what portions were transfe hly like the attached, with any other categories you think would be useful — and the thetica amples. That will help us fully ar, and what remains. 3503-026 Page 14 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001990 EFTA00157172

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

{Also just on the pictures do want copies of those as well, please including from the discs and the devices —| think FBI wa was no, we'll need to get those to be able to review them as well.) we do an initial screen to make sure no CP, and since | think the answe many thanks, = (om: aS (\.) ) Sent: Monday, February 24, 2020 09:24 To: ES (SANS) a; TT (USANYS) re es (USANYS) <i Cc: ES (USANYS) (Contractor) <j; EY (Usanys) ee: ee (SS) > SS (3!) Subject: RE: Epstein search warrant documents Sorry 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 Ist item on your spreadsheet, the "kitchen" mac has been produced. Still working on the rest. NY CART Coordinator Senior Forensic Examiner cell desk On Feb 23, 2020 12:21 A (USANYS)" < > wrote: Team, Following up on the below from last weekend, I’m still not sure how we're addressing this so | thought it would make sense for us to all schedule a a fhopeluny relatively brief) meeting to all get on the same page? We didn’t hear back on which files had pre ) been provided, but our tech folks did their bes 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, arch warrant returns, it looks like from the New York mansion (the PDF) Based on the attached s 40 devices that would have storage (computers, hard drives, thumb drives, there are approximatel 3503-026 Page 15 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001991 EFTA00157173

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

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 | 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 | think generally around the first week of March, which will hopefully be plenty of time to schedule a productive meeting. thanks all, From: ES (USANYS) Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2020 16:30 To ES (NY) (2) a I (ry) (81) a Cc: SE (USANYS) [Contractor] >; ay Po ee a 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 — | have the hard drive that [J dropped off that has new Epstein search warrant materials, but it looks like there are also old materials (that | think we had previously received and uploaded??) on the hard drive, and so I’m not sure what’s new. Just generally, and [J and | 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 | 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 | think that may be the materials we hadn't previously received? That folder by itself has more than 600,000 items. | don’t want to give J anything that we've already previously received and uploaded, and | 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. [J 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 | think 3503-026 Page 16 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001992 EFTA00157174

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

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 U.S. Attorney Southern District of New York 3503-026 Page 17 of 17 SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER PARAGRAPHS 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 EFTA_00001993 EFTA00157175