EFTA00035543.pdf
57.7 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
6
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Email thread
File Size:
57.7 KB
Summary
An email thread from July 24, 2019, between prison staff members discussing an incident involving Jeffrey Epstein. Staff members criticize a psychologist identified as 'D' for refusing to write a competency report for Epstein's disciplinary hearing; 'D' reportedly declined because Epstein claimed he didn't recall the incident, and she feared losing her license if cross-examined about her Suicide Risk Assessment (SRA) conducted the previous day. The emails confirm Epstein was on Suicide Watch (SW) or placed there immediately following an incident involving 'reported suicidality'.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Inmate |
Subject of the email discussion; recently involved in an incident and placed on Suicide Watch (SW).
|
| D | Psychologist/Staff |
Staff member criticized for refusing to write a competency report; expressed fear of losing license if testifying abo...
|
| M | Supervisor/Management |
Staff member criticized for inefficiency and poor leadership; asks others to handle reports.
|
| K2 | Staff Member |
Noticed M's inefficient email habits.
|
| It. [Lieutenant] | Correctional Officer |
Recipient of a reply regarding competency; abbreviation likely stands for Lieutenant.
|
| Redacted Senders/Recipients | Staff Members |
Authors of the email thread discussing the incident and internal politics.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Bureau of Prisons (implied) | ||
| MCC New York (implied) |
Timeline (3 events)
2019-07-23
SRA (Suicide Risk Assessment) conducted for Epstein.
Correctional Facility
Jeffrey Epstein
D (Psychologist)
2019-07-24
Email discussion regarding Epstein's competency report following an incident and Suicide Watch placement.
N/A
Staff Members
Unknown (Recent to 2019-07-24)
Epstein received an incident report and was placed on Suicide Watch (SW).
SW (Suicide Watch)
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
Relationships (2)
D conducted an SRA (Suicide Risk Assessment) on Epstein and was asked to assess his competency for a disciplinary report.
M
→
Supervisory
→
Staff Members
Staff members discuss M's leadership style and delegation of tasks.
Key Quotes (6)
"look what i just sent you about epstein"Source
EFTA00035543.pdf
Quote #1
"she said she will get torn up on the stand and lose her license if called in to testify about her SRA from yesterday"Source
EFTA00035543.pdf
Quote #2
"he received an incident report while on SW, or went to SW right after"Source
EFTA00035543.pdf
Quote #3
"he claims he doesn't recall the incident"Source
EFTA00035543.pdf
Quote #4
"the issue is a matter of the reported suicidality"Source
EFTA00035543.pdf
Quote #5
"D is so ridiculous lol. that's her job."Source
EFTA00035543.pdf
Quote #6
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,634 characters)
yep, totally
>>> [REDACTED] 7/24/2019 8:12 AM >>>
D is so ridiculous lol. that's her job. that's why M asks whoever saw the person for the SRA or whatever to do the disciplinary report. it seems like the reason he needs the report is because he received an incident report while on SW, or went to SW right after. we always do them in those cases, even for people who are not high care levels or forensics. the issue is a matter of the reported suicidality. all she needs to do is write what he said about the incident, and her opinion about it. if he shows no signs of memory loss or cause for concern, he's competent. she's not making a judgment on whether he's guilty of the infraction. she's just stating whether he's in his right mind to go through the process. isn't this part of her job as a psychologist lol?? or, if she really feels like she doesn't know, then that's what she should say in the report. i feel like we just enable her to skirt around her job and her clinical responsibilities, and i guess we're not going to change her at this point in her career, but it's really a shame that it's gotten this far, and yes, totally ridiculous for M to even involve you. poor leadership, again...
D is so ridiculous lol. that's her job. that's why M asks whoever saw the person for the SRA or whatever to do the disciplinary report. it seems like the reason he needs the report is because he received an incident report while on SW, or went to SW right after. we always do them in those cases, even for people who are not high care levels or forensics. the issue is a matter of the reported suicidality. all she needs to do is write what he said about the incident, and her opinion about it. if he shows no signs of memory loss or cause for concern, he's competent. she's not making a judgment on whether he's guilty of the infraction. she's just stating whether he's in his right mind to go through the process. isn't this part of her job as a psychologist lol?? or, if she really feels like she doesn't know, then that's what she should say in the report. i feel like we just enable her to skirt around her job and her clinical responsibilities, and i guess we're not going to change her at this point in her career, but it's really a shame that it's gotten this far, and yes, totally ridiculous for M to even involve you. poor leadership, again...
>>> [REDACTED] 7/24/2019 8:05 AM >>>
not even just the ineffectiveness of not sending the e-mail herself, but she's obvi avoiding delegating this to [REDACTED] b/c she's scared to tell her. [REDACTED] just declined to do it. saying she doesn't know if he was competent b/c he claims he doesn't recall the incident. she said she will get torn up on the stand and lose her license if called in to testify about her SRA from yesterday and a disciplinary report. so [REDACTED] then told me again to do it. anyway, looks like he would need it b/c he's not a CC3 or a study so [REDACTED] said she just replied to It. [REDACTED] saying he's competent and that should be sufficient. smart move of K2
not even just the ineffectiveness of not sending the e-mail herself, but she's obvi avoiding delegating this to [REDACTED] b/c she's scared to tell her. [REDACTED] just declined to do it. saying she doesn't know if he was competent b/c he claims he doesn't recall the incident. she said she will get torn up on the stand and lose her license if called in to testify about her SRA from yesterday and a disciplinary report. so [REDACTED] then told me again to do it. anyway, looks like he would need it b/c he's not a CC3 or a study so [REDACTED] said she just replied to It. [REDACTED] saying he's competent and that should be sufficient. smart move of K2
>>> [REDACTED] 7/24/2019 8:00 AM >>>
yeah, she does stuff like that all the time. it's so annoying. i just ignore her. she doesn't seem to get how inefficient it is to send an email to someone to tell them to send an email to someone else lol. makes no sense. even K2 has noticed it, and told me how M always sends her all these unnecessary emails, and how she has started to try to email her first, letting her know she already received things or already knows things, so that M doesn't have to tell her again or forward her emails she already has lol
yeah, she does stuff like that all the time. it's so annoying. i just ignore her. she doesn't seem to get how inefficient it is to send an email to someone to tell them to send an email to someone else lol. makes no sense. even K2 has noticed it, and told me how M always sends her all these unnecessary emails, and how she has started to try to email her first, letting her know she already received things or already knows things, so that M doesn't have to tell her again or forward her emails she already has lol
>>> [REDACTED] 7/24/2019 7:57 AM >>>
look what i just sent you about epstein - why does [REDACTED] tell me to send it to [REDACTED]? shouldn't this be her job as boss?
look what i just sent you about epstein - why does [REDACTED] tell me to send it to [REDACTED]? shouldn't this be her job as boss?
EFTA00035543
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document