DOJ-OGR-00022101.jpg

Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT Document 36 Filed 06/09/20 Page 5 of 9

arises where the Government conducts a joint investigation with another agency.” United States
v. Collins, 409 F. Supp. 3d 228, 239 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted). In determining whether the prosecution has conducted a joint investigation, courts in
this district look to a number of non-exhaustive factors, “including whether the other agency: (1)
participated in the prosecution’s witness interviews, (2) was involved in presenting the case to
the grand jury, (3) reviewed documents gathered by or shared documents with the prosecution,
(4) played a role in the development of prosecutorial strategy, or (5) accompanied the
prosecution to court proceedings.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

As under Rule 16, if the Government has represented that it is aware of and has complied
with its Brady and Giglio obligations, a defendant must make a “particularized showing that
materials exist requiring disclosure” in order to sustain a motion to compel. United States v.
Juliano, No. 99 Cr. 1197, 2000 WL 640644, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. May 18, 2000); see United States v.
Evanchik, 413 F.2d 950, 953 (2d Cir. 1969) (“[T]he assurance by the [G]overnment that it has in
its possession no undisclosed evidence that would tend to exculpate defendant justifies the denial
of a motion for inspection that does not make some particularized showing of materiality and
usefulness.”)

II. Inspector General Materials

Thomas seeks disclosure of both the investigatory materials from the Department of
Justice Office of the Inspector General’s (“OIG”) investigation regarding Epstein’s death, and a
draft of the Inspector General’s report arising from that investigation. Motion at 5. The
Government concedes that attorneys from OIG participated in the Government’s investigation
that led to the indictment of Thomas. Gov’t Opp. at 3, 19. But, the Government represents that

5

DOJ-OGR-00022101