EFTA00014290.pdf
67.7 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
5
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Email chain
File Size:
67.7 KB
Summary
A June 2021 email chain among USANYS staff discussing a security concern raised by EOUSA regarding a data transfer. EOUSA flagged documents stamped 'CONFIDENTIAL' related to Epstein as a potential 'classified spill' because they were unredacted. USANYS staff clarified that the stamp referred to a protective order in the litigation, not national security classification, and noted the production involved 5GB of non-testifying witness material (Jencks Act material).
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein | Subject of documents |
Documents stamped 'CONFIDENTIAL' were found to relate to Epstein.
|
| [Redacted] | Computer Security Chief at EOUSA |
Called USANYS regarding potential classified spill; noted documents related to Epstein were not redacted.
|
| [Redacted] | USANYS Personnel |
Senders and recipients of the emails discussing the data transfer issue.
|
| Contracting Officer | Official at Justice Management Division |
To be notified of a potential classified spill by a contractor.
|
| Criminal Chief | USANYS Official |
Instructed to potentially contact the FBI.
|
| AUSA | Assistant United States Attorney |
Instructed to potentially contact the FBI.
|
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| USANYS |
United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (email domain/affiliation).
|
|
| EOUSA |
Executive Office for United States Attorneys; raised the security concern.
|
|
| FBI |
Federal Bureau of Investigation; requested to review documents for classification status.
|
|
| Justice Management Division |
Department where the Contracting Officer is located.
|
|
| General Counsel's Office |
To be included in a call regarding the issue.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2021-06-03
Call from EOUSA Computer Security Chief to USANYS regarding potential classified spill involving Epstein documents.
N/A
USANYS Employee
EOUSA Security Chief
Key Quotes (4)
"He also said these documents were not redacted and relate to Epstein. I told him they do relate to Epstein."Source
EFTA00014290.pdf
Quote #1
"notify her of a potential classified spill by a contractor."Source
EFTA00014290.pdf
Quote #2
"production (which consisted of 5GB of non-testifying witness 3500)"Source
EFTA00014290.pdf
Quote #3
"Security people have complained in the past that the rubric 'confidential' should be reserved for classified information"Source
EFTA00014290.pdf
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,907 characters)
From: [Redacted] (USANYS)" <[Redacted]>
To: "[Redacted] (USANYS)" <[Redacted]>, "[Redacted] (USANYS)"
<[Redacted]>, "[Redacted] (USANYS)" <[Redacted]>,
"[Redacted]" <[Redacted]>, "[Redacted] (USANYS)" <[Redacted]>,
"[Redacted] (USANYS)" <[Redacted]>, "[Redacted] (USANYS)"
<[Redacted]>
Subject: RE: [Redacted] Data Transfer Issue
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2021 17:31:35 +0000
To: "[Redacted] (USANYS)" <[Redacted]>, "[Redacted] (USANYS)"
<[Redacted]>, "[Redacted] (USANYS)" <[Redacted]>,
"[Redacted]" <[Redacted]>, "[Redacted] (USANYS)" <[Redacted]>,
"[Redacted] (USANYS)" <[Redacted]>, "[Redacted] (USANYS)"
<[Redacted]>
Subject: RE: [Redacted] Data Transfer Issue
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2021 17:31:35 +0000
We stamped "Confidential" on every page of the particular production [Redacted] uploaded because it is a defined term in our
Court-ordered protective order. Per my conversation with [Redacted] just now, I will send [Redacted] a copy of one page of that
production (which consisted of 5GB of non-testifying witness 3500) along with our protective order, with the hopes that
we can head this off.
Court-ordered protective order. Per my conversation with [Redacted] just now, I will send [Redacted] a copy of one page of that
production (which consisted of 5GB of non-testifying witness 3500) along with our protective order, with the hopes that
we can head this off.
From: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>
Sent: Thursday, June 3, 2021 12:15 PM
To: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted]
[Redacted]) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS)
<[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS)
<[Redacted]>
Subject: RE: [Redacted] Data Transfer Issue
Sent: Thursday, June 3, 2021 12:15 PM
To: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted]
[Redacted]) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS)
<[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS)
<[Redacted]>
Subject: RE: [Redacted] Data Transfer Issue
Security people have complained in the past that the rubric "confidential" should be reserved for classified
information, but "confidential" is in such common use in litigation and in protective orders that such a limitation
on its use never seemed workable. This is a little over the top, but that's what security is these days.
information, but "confidential" is in such common use in litigation and in protective orders that such a limitation
on its use never seemed workable. This is a little over the top, but that's what security is these days.
From: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>
Sent: Thursday, June 3, 2021 12:06 PM
To: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] ) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted]
(USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS)
<[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS)
<[Redacted]>
Subject: [Redacted] Data Transfer Issue
Sent: Thursday, June 3, 2021 12:06 PM
To: [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] ) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted]
(USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS)
<[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS) <[Redacted]>; [Redacted] (USANYS)
<[Redacted]>
Subject: [Redacted] Data Transfer Issue
I am including everyone in this email because this situation has the potential to spin further out of control.
I just received a call from [Redacted], the computer security chief at EOUSA. They have been continuing to look at this
situation. They have been reviewing the documents that were sent and have found documents that are stamped,
"CONFIDENTIAL". Such a stamping to them indicates the documents might be classified. He also said these documents
were not redacted and relate to Epstein. I told him they do relate to Epstein. [Redacted] instructed me to have the Criminal
Chief or the AUSA contact the FBI to have them look at the documents and determine if they are classified. He wants this
done asap so that we can have a call later in the day with him and others, include the General Counsel's Office. He also
told me to notify the Contracting Officer on the this contract (she is at the Justice Management Division) and notify her of
a potential classified spill by a contractor. I told him I would do that if it is determined there was a classified spill.
[Redacted]
situation. They have been reviewing the documents that were sent and have found documents that are stamped,
"CONFIDENTIAL". Such a stamping to them indicates the documents might be classified. He also said these documents
were not redacted and relate to Epstein. I told him they do relate to Epstein. [Redacted] instructed me to have the Criminal
Chief or the AUSA contact the FBI to have them look at the documents and determine if they are classified. He wants this
done asap so that we can have a call later in the day with him and others, include the General Counsel's Office. He also
told me to notify the Contracting Officer on the this contract (she is at the Justice Management Division) and notify her of
a potential classified spill by a contractor. I told him I would do that if it is determined there was a classified spill.
[Redacted]
EFTA00014290
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document