From: Jeevacation [email protected]> To: Martin Weinberg Subject: Re: ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:49:00 +0000 I thought he received a gj sub from Marie in Jan 07 Sent from my iPhone On Dec 18, 2009, at 8:46 AM, "Martin Weinberg" < > wrote: one possibility is that she is/was part of the Rothstein FBI investigation i.e. that Edwards' cooperation in late October (as a CW) regarding AR was just part of a larger effort to exclude himself from the growing storm a second possibility is that they did not want Kirkendahllyour FBI investigators involved (except as a confirming witness) so that the FBI would not look as if they were circumventing the NPA if they sent evidence to other districts a more innocuous alternative is that the case is by information, he is pleading, and that there was no need to have the paperwork signed by a more exp agent interestingly, I am not sure there even is a crime - obstructing a state investigation is not obstructing an "official proceeding" - if the FBI 1-07 interview did not seek does and did not ask if he had does then it would be hard for them to prove an intent to "corruptly" intend to impair the availability of the doc for use in the federal gj - and I am not at all sure that not bringing a doc to a civil deposition could be converted into "the official proceeding before a judge, court". Ordinarily would require a federal GJ subpoena and a resulting concealment. Original Message -- From: Jeffrey Epstein To: Martin Weinberg • Roy Black Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 6:05AM should we read anything into the fact that marie used a fbi agent with only three months experience ,. not conected with anythingr but street gangs in miami? * ***** ***************************************************** The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is