RE: Inquiry from The Guardian re 2007 Epstein email

Dea

Pm a reporter for The Guardian. Pm working on an article about the Jeffrey Epstein case and plan to mention an email you sent his attorney from your personal Gmail account in 2007 (attached).

In the email you make a suggestion about how to minimize media coverage, apparently after a desire to do so was articulated by his attorney.

Do you now think this was appropriate? Why did you send the email from your Gmail rather than your government account, from which you sent other emails relating to this agreement?

Thanks and best wishes

Jon Swaine

EFTA00210104

Thank you, I=

Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 1:27 PM

Subject: FW: Inquiry from The Guardian re 2007 Epstein email

Please see the attached inquiry from the Guardian newspaper. I believe that the Guardian received this email from counsel for the Jane Doe plaintiffs.

I will leave it to you whether to respond.

With regard to his inquiry, the email was sent from my personal email because I was at home recovering from surgery at the time. There were a number of emails sent from my personal email because I was working from home during this period.

Regarding the "avoid the press," I was given marching orders to draft a federal plea agreement that would result in a 24-month statutory max. A plea to federal charges would have guaranteed to the victims all of the rights provided by the CVRA including the right to be present at all court proceedings. At that time, all of the victims had wanted to maintain their anonymity, so the suggestion regarding avoiding the press was not, from my recollection, in response to any desire articulated by Mr. Epstein's attorney. Instead, it would have allowed those victims who wanted to attend the proceedings to do so without having to face the firestorm of press coverage that would have forced them to lose that anonymity.

Throughout the years of investigating the case, the case agents and I dedicated ourselves to protecting and respecting the rights of each witness whom we interviewed and struggled mightily to balance all of their desires collectively. The fact that some of the witnesses now claim a willingness to be publicly identified does not diminish our need to protect and respect the rights of those who still wish to remain anonymous.

Please let me know if you need any other information.

EFTA00210103