RE: Material Witness PA

See below on the MLAT. The only issue for you is the Nygard one I raised briefly earlier this week — the Home Office doesn't think we're predicated on Nygard, and unless we provide further specifics about Andrew's knowledge of or involvement in criminal conduct in that case, they are not going to process that aspect of the MLAT. I take it from our conversation that there is no more info to provide. If so, can we tell them we are withdrawing our request as it pertains to Nygard and only asking them to proceed on Epstein?

Dear Philomena, Julian, and Dawn:

Thank you for taking the time to speak with us about the status of our MLA request in the Material Witness PA matter. You asked that we confer and then get back to you on an appropriate timeline for the completion of any discussions with counsel for a voluntary interview. The case team and I have had an opportunity to discuss this, and I have now had an opportunity to review the correspondence between the team and Gary Bloxsome beginning in January 2020.

Having reviewed this, it is plain to me that there has developed a significant mutual lack of trust between the case team and Blackfords. As a result, the possibility of a voluntary interview, done outside the context of the MLA request, is effectively nil. The case team believes, and I agree, that delaying the execution of the MLA request in the hope that Blackfords changes its position on a voluntary interview, will simply be an exercise in futility.

That is not to say that the witness will continue to decline an interview once requested by UK law enforcement in connection with an MLA request. Mr. Bloxsome has repeatedly stated, although without committing to any particular step, that his client is willing to assist the investigation. While there is some reason to question whether these claims are simply posturing, it may be that offering an interview in the context of a more formal request provides a more agreeable forum and structure for the witness. Moreover, in that context, the UKCA and UK law enforcement will see whether the witness will in fact answer questions about the crimes under investigation. As you will recall, the MLA request suggests that the initial approach by UK law enforcement be one for a consensual interview rather than testimony before a UK court. Our hope is that your experience is better than the case team's.

In short, efforts to obtain a truly voluntary interview have been exhausted. The case team has yet to see any commitment from Blackfords to making their client available to be questioned by law enforcement. We again request that the UKCA move forward without further delay.

Finally, my intention was to share with you the written correspondence from Blackfords in February which states in no uncertain terms that, "there is no purpose to be served in continuing to try to assist further." However, Blackfords requested that communication to be "private and confidential," and if we were to share its entirety with you, I am certain that we would be criticized for breaching a requested confidence.

Many thanks for your ongoing assistance in this matter.

Best,

EFTA00088022

U.S. Department of Justice Attaché
United States Embassy - London

Thanks

I appreciate you setting out the position regarding the merits of continuing down the non MIA route.

As you know there is further work required and Dawn will continue to liaise with the US prosecution team. The next mile stone appears to be settling the position on the second investigation. Hopefully that can be reached relatively quickly.

As the US Attorney General and the Home Secretary as keen to meet in person, we may yet see each other in person.

All the best
Philomena

Philomena Creffield | Deputy Director & Head of UK Central Authority | International Directorate | BICS Policy & International Group
Home Office | [Redacted] | London SW1P 4DF | mob: [Redacted]

Delivering Judicial Cooperation Globally