DOJ-OGR-00023325.tif

METHODOLOGY

A. Document Review

As referenced in the Executive Summary, OPR obtained and reviewed hundreds of
thousands of pages of documents from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of
Florida (USAO), other U.S. Attorney's offices, the FBI, and other Department components,
including the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Criminal Division, and the Executive
Office for U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA). The categories of documents reviewed by OPR, and their
sources, are set forth below.

1. USAO Records

The USAO provided OPR with access to all of its records from its handling of the Epstein
investigation and the CVRA litigation. The records included, but were not limited to, boxes of
material that Villafaña updated and maintained through the course of both actions, which contained
pleadings from the Epstein investigation, the CVRA litigation, and other related cases; extensive
compilations of internal and external correspondence, including letters and emails; evidence such
as telephone records, FBI reports, material received from the state investigation, and other
confidential investigative records; court transcripts; investigative transcripts; prosecution team
handwritten notes; research material; and draft and final case documents such as the NPA,
prosecution memoranda, and federal indictments.

The USAO also provided OPR with access to filings, productions, and privileged material
in the CVRA litigation; Outlook data collected to respond to production requests in that case; a set
of Epstein case documents maintained by Acosta and Sloman; computer files regarding the Epstein
case collected by Sloman; Villafaña's Outlook data; Acosta's hard drive; and the permanently
retained official U.S. Attorney records of Acosta held by the Federal Records Center.

2. EOUSA Records

EOUSA provided OPR with Outlook data from all five subjects and six additional
witnesses. This information, dating back to 2005, included all inbox, outbox, sent, deleted, and
saved emails, and calendar entries that it maintained. EOUSA provided OPR with over 850,000
Outlook records in total (not including email attachments or excluding duplicate records). OPR
identified key time periods and fully reviewed those records. OPR applied search terms to the
remainder of the records and reviewed any responsive documents.

After reviewing the emails, OPR identified a data gap in Acosta's email records: his inbox
contained no emails from May 26, 2007, through November 2, 2008. This gap, however, was not
present with respect to Acosta's sent email. OPR requested that EOUSA investigate. During its
investigation, EOUSA discovered a data association error that incorrectly associated Acosta's data
with an unrelated employee who had a similar name. Once the data was properly associated,
EOUSA found and produced 11,248 Acosta emails from April 3, 2008, through the end of his
tenure at the USAO. However, with respect to the remaining emails, EOUSA concluded that the
emails were not transferred from the USAO when, in 2008 and 2009, Outlook data for all U.S.

287

DOJ-OGR-00023325