DOJ-OGR-00000643.jpg

be NO Ww ws Oo OY ~] oO Ke) a oO he be No (ee) = Hs Oo _ OY a ~] a oO a Ke} 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document53_ Filed 09/03/19 Page 5 of 86 5 J8RSEPS1 today, I don't think it would be very significant. On a somewhat more serious note, don't quote me on this, but it is my understanding that one of the authors of that article is himself counsel in one of the Epstein-related cases. I was surprised to learn that very recently. I'm certain it is true. I was also surprised that that aspect was not disclosed in the Law Journal. But in any event, I respectfully disagree with [ think you know where the Law Journal piece. I'm heading. I was saying straigh that the government's motion is relatively tforward, and in my view, a public hearing nevertheless, still convinced of is clearly, rred vehic]l for the pref its resolution. I'm that. A few may differ on this, but public hearings are Hearings promote transparency and they the court with insights and information which the court exactly what judges do. provide may not otherwise be aware of. both because of should always be involved before rather The victims have been included in the proceeding today their relevant experiences and because they than after the fact. Indictment 19 CR 490 charges Jeffrey Epstein with sex trafficking and with conspiracy to commit sex trafficking. The U.S. Attorney, on August 19, 2019, requested that the court approve the government's proposed order of nolle prosequi. think that's a rough justice. That means SOUTHERN D STR (212) CT REPORTERS, P.C. 805-0300 nolle prosequi, DOJ-OGR-00000643