Gary Bloxsome
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Prince Andrew
|
Legal representative |
3
|
3 | |
|
person
HRH The Duke of York
|
Client |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Prince Andrew, the Duke of York
|
Client |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
[Redacted AUSA]
|
Opposing counsel |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Daniel Cundy
|
Professional |
1
|
1 | |
|
location
USANYS
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
HRH The Duke of York
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Alison/SDNY
|
Opposing counsel |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jennifer Richardson
|
Business associate |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
SDNY Assistant U.S. Attorney
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Assistant U.S. Attorney
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Daniel Cundy
|
Business associate |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Prince Andrew
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed Client
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Duke of York
|
Client |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-09-23 | N/A | Email correspondence regarding reference materials following a phone call. | View | |
| 2020-08-11 | N/A | Proposed follow-up call between SDNY and Gary Bloxsome. | Phone (London/New York) | View |
| 2020-08-03 | N/A | Scheduled call at 4:00 p.m. (LDN time) | Phone/Remote | View |
| 2020-08-03 | N/A | Teleconference between SDNY prosecutors and Blackfords LLP lawyers. | Teleconference (4:00 PM LDN... | View |
| 2020-07-27 | N/A | Conference call between Blackfords legal team and SDNY team. | Teleconference | View |
| 2020-07-27 | N/A | Scheduled conference call between Blackfords LLP (Gary Bloxsome) and SDNY to discuss potential in... | Teleconference | View |
| 2020-07-27 | N/A | Conversation between SDNY and Gary Bloxsome | Phone/Remote | View |
| 2020-07-14 | N/A | Proposal of a 'Negotiation Period' regarding Prince Andrew's interview | Email Correspondence | View |
| 2020-06-08 | N/A | Public statement issued by Prince Andrew's legal team (referenced in emails) | UK/Media | View |
| 2020-01-10 | N/A | Preliminary phone call between DOJ prosecutors and Prince Andrew's legal team. | Telephone | View |
| 2020-01-10 | N/A | Proposed preliminary telephone call between Gary Bloxsome (counsel for Prince Andrew) and SDNY pr... | Telephone | View |
| 2020-01-10 | N/A | Scheduled telephone call between Gary Bloxsome and DOJ team. | Telephone | View |
| 2020-01-10 | N/A | Preliminary telephone call between Blackfords LLP (Gary Bloxsome) and US Prosecutors (SDNY). | Telephone | View |
| 2020-01-10 | N/A | Telephone conversation between Gary Bloxsome and SDNY prosecutors regarding the interview request. | Telephone | View |
| 2020-01-10 | N/A | Proposed preliminary telephone call between Blackfords LLP (Gary Bloxsome) and SDNY Prosecutors. | Telephone | View |
| 2020-01-02 | N/A | US DOJ prosecutors reach out to Prince Andrew's legal counsel regarding the Jeffrey Epstein inves... | Email correspondence | View |
EFTA00030698.pdf
This document is an email chain from January 2020 between Gary Bloxsome (Blackfords LLP) and prosecutors from the U.S. Department of Justice, Southern District of New York (SDNY). The SDNY formally requests a 'consensual, voluntary law enforcement interview' with Bloxsome's client, HRH The Duke of York (Prince Andrew), regarding the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. Bloxsome confirms he represents the Duke and arranges a preliminary telephone call for January 10, 2020.
EFTA00030692.pdf
This document is a chain of emails between the U.S. Department of Justice (SDNY) and Gary Bloxsome of Blackfords LLP in early January 2020. The DOJ formally requests a voluntary law enforcement interview with Bloxsome's client, HRH The Duke of York (Prince Andrew), regarding his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The correspondence confirms Blackfords' representation of the Duke and arranges a preliminary telephone discussion for January 10, 2020.
EFTA00030190.pdf
This document contains a chain of email correspondence between the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS) and Gary Bloxsome, the attorney representing Prince Andrew (the Duke of York), from January to June 2020. The correspondence details the DOJ's attempts to schedule a voluntary interview with Prince Andrew regarding the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, and the subsequent breakdown in relations after U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman publicly stated that the Prince had provided "zero cooperation." The emails show the legal team's stalling regarding "procedures" and their anger at the breach of perceived confidentiality, while the DOJ expresses frustration at the lack of a commitment to an interview date.
EFTA00028537.pdf
This document is an email header dated September 23, 2020, sent to Gary Bloxsome and copied to Daniel Cundy, Jennifer Richardson, and an individual at USANYS. The subject line 'RE: Reference materials further to our call' suggests a legal or professional follow-up providing documentation after a discussion. The document contains standard email metadata and significant redactions of contact information.
EFTA00026542.pdf
This document contains an email exchange from January 2020 between Gary Bloxsome of Blackfords LLP and federal prosecutors from the Southern District of New York. The prosecutors, investigating conduct related to Jeffrey Epstein, inquired if Blackfords represented HRH The Duke of York (Prince Andrew). Gary Bloxsome confirmed the representation and asked for clarification regarding the specific reason for the contact.
EFTA00023817.pdf
This document is an email chain from July 28 to August 3, 2020, between SDNY prosecutors (including an AUSA and Alison) and UK defense attorneys from Blackfords LLP (Gary Bloxsome, Jennifer Richardson). The correspondence negotiates the terms of a voluntary interview for a Blackfords client (unnamed in text, but contextually relevant to Prince Andrew) in connection with 'US v Maxwell'. Key topics include protections against evidence use outside the Maxwell case, immunity comparable to MLAT proceedings, elements of 18 U.S.C. 1001 (False Statements), and the extension of a 'Negotiation Period' to August 10, 2020.
EFTA00023804.pdf
This document is a chain of email correspondence between the U.S. Department of Justice (SDNY) and Gary Bloxsome, the lawyer representing Prince Andrew, spanning January to February 2020. The DOJ explicitly requests a voluntary interview with Prince Andrew regarding his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. While Bloxsome claims the Prince desires to cooperate, tensions escalate when U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman publicly states that Prince Andrew has provided 'zero cooperation,' leading Bloxsome to accuse the DOJ of breaching confidentiality agreements.
EFTA00023791.pdf
This document contains a chain of emails between Gary Bloxsome (representing Prince Andrew, the Duke of York) and an Assistant U.S. Attorney from the Southern District of New York (SDNY) in July 2020. The correspondence details tense negotiations regarding a request for Prince Andrew to sit for a voluntary interview concerning the Epstein investigation. Key points of contention include the confidentiality of the proceedings, allegations of media leaks by US officials (specifically Geoffrey Berman and Audrey Strauss), and the legal mechanisms of the interview (voluntary vs. compelled via MLAT). The SDNY proposes a two-week confidential negotiation period to resolve the impasse.
EFTA00023783.pdf
This document is a chain of emails between Gary Bloxsome (counsel for Prince Andrew/Duke of York) and an Assistant U.S. Attorney from the Southern District of New York in July 2020. The correspondence concerns negotiations for Prince Andrew to provide a voluntary interview to US authorities regarding the Epstein investigation. The US side threatens a compelled interview via MLAT if no voluntary date is set, while the UK side complains about leaks, 'media circus', and seeks strict confidentiality assurances before agreeing to an interview.
EFTA00023782.pdf
Email from an SDNY Assistant U.S. Attorney to Gary Bloxsome (lawyer, likely for Prince Andrew based on context of 2020 Epstein/Maxwell investigation and MLAT/London references) regarding 'Sensitive Correspondence.' The email provides a blank proffer agreement, outlines the legal elements of making false statements under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and discusses protections under the MLAT process for a potential voluntary interview. It also confirms a negotiation period extension until August 10, 2020.
EFTA00022980.pdf
This document is a chain of emails between the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) and Blackfords LLP, legal counsel for Prince Andrew, in January 2020. The DOJ formally requests a voluntary interview with Prince Andrew regarding the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. While Prince Andrew's lawyers claim he desires to cooperate, they delay the interview to handle 'preliminary issues,' leading to public tension when US Attorney Geoffrey Berman tells the press there has been 'zero co-operation,' provoking an angry rebuttal from Blackfords.
EFTA00022201.pdf
This document is an email thread between an Assistant U.S. Attorney from the Southern District of New York and Gary Bloxsome, a partner at Blackfords LLP in London, dating from July 28 to August 10, 2020. The correspondence details negotiations for a 'voluntary interview' (proffer) of Bloxsome's unnamed client regarding the client's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, specifically focusing on communications and knowledge of sexual activity with women or girls. Key points of negotiation include the scope of immunity (SDNY offering limited use immunity versus the broader protections of an MLAT compelled interview) and the specific legal ramifications of providing false statements under 18 U.S.C. Section 1001.
EFTA00022199.pdf
An email from Daniel Cundy (Blackfords LLP) dated August 9, 2020, providing legal reference materials following a phone call. The email attaches extracts regarding Financial Conduct Authority procedures and criminal law fraud procedures. The text discusses legal protections regarding compulsory powers in MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) requests, citing *United States v. Allen* and *Kastigar v. United States* (protection against self-incrimination).
EFTA00017042.pdf
This document is a chain of email correspondence between the U.S. Department of Justice (Southern District of New York) and Gary Bloxsome, the attorney representing Prince Andrew (Duke of York), spanning January to February 2020. The DOJ formally requests a voluntary interview with Prince Andrew regarding his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The correspondence deteriorates into a dispute over confidentiality after US Attorney Geoffrey Berman publicly states that Prince Andrew has provided 'zero cooperation,' which Bloxsome argues violates previous assurances of confidentiality and misrepresents the Duke's willingness to cooperate.
EFTA00010321.pdf
This document is an email chain from August and September 2020 between the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) and Blackfords LLP, the legal team representing the Duke of York (Prince Andrew). The correspondence details a stalemate in negotiations regarding the Duke's cooperation with the investigation into Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. The Duke's lawyers offer a written witness statement limited primarily to the 1994-1997 period, citing concerns that the US views him as a 'subject' rather than a witness. The SDNY rejects this offer, declaring the written statement insufficient, and informs the defense they will proceed with a Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) request to the UK authorities (UKCA) to seek a compelled interview.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Reaction to press reports of Berman's disclosure; expressing concern about misleading impressions affecting ability to advise client.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Defends Berman's statement as factually accurate because the Duke had not yet agreed to an interview. Notes they are still waiting for a determination on whether he is willing to speak.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Expresses concern that Berman disclosed confidential communications to the press and created a 'misleading impression' that affects their ability to advise the Duke to cooperate.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Complaint about U.S. Attorney Berman's public statement regarding "zero cooperation".
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Response that Berman corrected a public misimpression and statement was factual.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
SDNY claims Berman made a factual statement correcting the record that the Prince has not yet provided cooperation. Looks forward to hearing if the Prince is willing to speak.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Bloxsome complains that U.S. Attorney Berman disclosed confidential communications to the press and stated the Duke has not cooperated. Reasserts Duke's desire to cooperate but expresses concern over misleading impressions.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Stating Berman made a factual statement correcting the record; looking forward to hearing if client will speak.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Declines DOJ offer of assistance/discussion on procedures. States they need to gather information from the Royal Household and others first.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Stating they cannot help at present; need to gather information from Royal Household.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
States they do not believe SDNY can help with preliminary tasks at present. Will welcome conversation once information is gathered from Royal Household.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
SDNY asks for understanding of the issues causing delay. Notes investigation is moving expeditiously. Offers phone call.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
States the Duke has a 'strong desire to cooperate fully' but lawyers need two weeks to deal with 'minor preliminary issues'.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Presses for an answer on the core question: Is the Duke willing to speak with them? Notes that procedural delays shouldn't prevent answering that threshold question.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
States Prince has strong desire to cooperate but they must deal with issues/procedures first.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Asking for clarification on issues/procedures causing delay; requesting phone call.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Bloxsome states Duke has strong desire to cooperate but they must deal with procedural issues first. Estimates two weeks for minor preliminary issues.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Stating Duke has strong desire to cooperate but procedural issues need addressing; will update in two weeks.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Follow up after call; asking specifically if client is willing to speak.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Follow up on phone conversation from a week ago. Asks if client is willing to speak.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Confirms call for Friday Jan 10th at 1400 LDN time.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Request for preliminary call on Jan 10.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Bloxsome asks to schedule a preliminary telephone call for Friday, January 10th.
Re: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Bloxsome requests a preliminary telephone call on Friday, January 10th, 2020.
RE: U.S. Department of Justice investigation
Scheduling discussion for the call; suggests 9 a.m. Friday.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity