Datasets:
title: DOJ Epstein Files, Data Set 9 (EFTA00094116)
source: DOJ Epstein Files, Data Set 9
sourceUrl: https://huggingface.co/datasets/ishumilin/epstein-files-ocr-complete
date: '2026-01-01'
category: DOJ Data Set
eftaNumber: EFTA00094116
ocrPages: 0
ocrChars: 1475
ocrElapsed: 0
parseTier: external
engine: ishumilin OCR pipeline (engine undisclosed; CC0 mirror)
externalSource: ishumilin-ocr-complete
externalLicense: CC0-1.0
externalCredit: ishumilin/epstein-files-ocr-complete (Hugging Face)
externalUrl: https://huggingface.co/datasets/ishumilin/epstein-files-ocr-complete
From:
Subject: RE: Tartaglione Redactions Question
Date: Mon, 03 May 2021 01:28:57 +0000
Got it. Thank you!
From:
Sent: Sunday, May 2, 2021 8:57 PM
Subject: RE: Tartaglione Redactions Question
My view is that we redact references to Epstein’s memory of the incident and injuries from the incident be redacted because they tend to reveal details of the incident. I would also redact references to Epstein’s safety concerns in the SHU after the incident because they tend to suggest that Epstein was implying he was attacked during the incident.
I've redboxed my proposed redactions in the email you sent.
Thanks,
From:
Sent: Sunday, May 2, 2021 8:50 PM
To:
Subject: Tartaglione Redactions Question
I think we have inconsistent Tartaglione reactions on the text in the attached. The text also appears in some medical records. Specifically, had the following note on page 2624: RIP - redact "but he said he thinks his memory for the incident (injury to his neck) may be impaired because of his sleep apnea" and "He then asked if he could remain down here where it is 'safe' for the entire week"
Should I redact that in these emails too? If so, could you please tell me specifically what on this page should be redacted?
Or, if these sentences are innocuous and do not need to be redacted, can I lift the similar lines in the medical records?
Thanks,
Assistant United States Attorney
300 Quarropas Street
White Plains, NY 10601
EFTA00094116