EFTA00011026.pdf
151 KB
Extraction Summary
8
People
3
Organizations
2
Locations
2
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal correspondence / court order
File Size:
151 KB
Summary
Judge Richard M. Berman writes to Professor Bruce A. Green regarding Green's recent Law Journal opinion piece which criticized the court's handling of the Epstein dismissal hearing. Judge Berman notes a potential undisclosed conflict of interest, revealing that Green had been retained as an ethics expert in a related civil case (Giuffre v. Dershowitz) to argue for the disqualification of David Boies, the attorney representing the victims whose speaking rights Green criticized in his article.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Richard M. Berman | United States District Judge |
Author of the letter, presiding judge in US v. Epstein (1:19-cr-00490-RMB).
|
| Bruce A. Green | Professor / Ethics Expert |
Recipient of the letter; Louis Stein Chair at Fordham University School of Law. Retained in [Giuffre] v. Dershowitz.
|
| David Boies | Attorney |
Attorney for Ms. Giuffre; Green argued for his disqualification. Copied on the letter.
|
| Virginia Giuffre | Victim / Litigant |
Referred to as 'Ms. Guiffre' and 'Ms. [Redacted]'. Represented by David Boies.
|
| Alan Dershowitz | Defendant (Civil) |
Mentioned in case title '[Redacted] v. Dershowitz'.
|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Defendant (Criminal) |
Mentioned in case title 'US v. Epstein'.
|
| Martin G. Weinberg | Attorney |
Copied on the letter.
|
| Reid Weingarten | Attorney |
Copied on the letter.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court Southern District of New York |
Court where the document was filed.
|
|
| Fordham University School of Law |
Institution where Bruce A. Green is a professor.
|
|
| Law Journal |
Publication where Green published his opinion piece.
|
Timeline (2 events)
2019-08-27
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Address of the USDC SDNY.
|
|
|
Address of Professor Bruce A. Green.
|
Relationships (3)
Green provided an ethics opinion arguing Boies should be disqualified from representing Ms. Giuffre.
Boies representing Ms. Guiffre.
Berman writing to Green about his conduct/opinion piece.
Key Quotes (3)
"I remain surprised that your advocacy of Mr. Boies’ disqualification from representing Ms. Guiffre (in a case obviously related to US v. Epstein) was not disclosed simultaneously with your August 26, 2019 Law Journal opinion piece"Source
EFTA00011026.pdf
Quote #1
"This is an odd moment for transparency in a criminal case."Source
EFTA00011026.pdf
Quote #2
"[W]hatever informational interests the victims may have would be served by affording them a chance to attend the hearing, not by giving them a speaking role."Source
EFTA00011026.pdf
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,338 characters)
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 56 Filed 09/04/19 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE
500 PEARL STREET
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10007
(212) 805-6715
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE
500 PEARL STREET
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10007
(212) 805-6715
CHAMBERS OF
RICHARD M. BERMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
RICHARD M. BERMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 9/4/19
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 9/4/19
Bruce A. Green
Louis Stein Chair
Fordham University School of Law
150 West 62nd Street
Room 7-168
New York City, NY 10023
Louis Stein Chair
Fordham University School of Law
150 West 62nd Street
Room 7-168
New York City, NY 10023
September 4, 2019
Dear Professor Green,
Thank you for your letter of August 30, 2019. I appreciate your taking the time to clarify the record.
I learned that you had been “retained to provide opinions as an expert on legal ethics” in [Redacted] v. Dershowitz following the August 27, 2019 public hearing in US v. Epstein. I learned of your role in the [Redacted] case by reading your affidavit, dated June 7, 2019, which includes your legal ethics opinion that David Boies should be disqualified from representing Ms. [Redacted] in that matter. As you are aware, both Mr. Boies and Ms. [Redacted] were invited to testify at the August 27, 2019 hearing.
I remain surprised that your advocacy of Mr. Boies’ disqualification from representing Ms. Guiffre (in a case obviously related to US v. Epstein) was not disclosed simultaneously with your August 26, 2019 Law Journal opinion piece entitled “The Judge in Epstein’s Case Should Not Turn the Dismissal Into a Drama for the Victims.” I am also surprised that you would find the August 27, 2019 public hearing to be an inappropriate occasion for transparency in light of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 57 and the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771. You wrote: “This is an odd moment for transparency in a criminal case.”
1
EFTA00011026
EFTA00011026
Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB Document 56 Filed 09/04/19 Page 2 of 2
Finally, it is unfortunate that your opinion piece may have been construed as an effort to chill Ms. [Redacted] and Mr. Boies’ right to be heard under 18 U.S.C. § 3771 at the August 27, 2019 public hearing. You wrote: “[W]hatever informational interests the victims may have would be served by affording them a chance to attend the hearing, not by giving them a speaking role.”
Sincerely,
Richard M. Berman
U.S.D.J.
Richard M. Berman
U.S.D.J.
cc: AU [Redacted] Martin G. Weinberg, Esq.;
Reid Weingarten, Esq.; David Boies, Esq.
Reid Weingarten, Esq.; David Boies, Esq.
2
EFTA00011027
EFTA00011027
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document