(date: 2008-06-20) Memorandum
Subject
Memorandum seeking Travel Authorization
Operation Leap Year
Dote
June 20, 2008
TO
Rolando Garcia, Deputy Chief
Criminal Division
Karen Atkinson, Chic
Northern Division
From
A. Marie Villaf
Assistant U.S. A
I. INTRODUCTION
This memorandum seeks travel authorization to travel to New York from June 19 to June 20,
2008, in connection with Operation Leap Year.
II. THE PROPOSED TRAVEL AND ITS PURPOSE
As you know, we plan to present a final indictment to the grand jury in approximately two
weeks. Since our original planned indictment, we have learned about a series of victims in New
York and the ssible involvement of Epstein 's two New York-based assistants, and
The inclusion of New York victims would be a great benefit to the indictment, and
we would like to interview some key people in New York in order to include that evidence in the
indictment.
Accordingly, I propose to travel to New York on the afternoon of Thursday, June 19 to
conduct interviews on Friday, June 20, 2008.' FBI Special Agents Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and Jason
Richards also will be traveling, although they may stay longer.
First, we would like to interview She has been identified by two victims
as someone who recruited numerous others to Epstein 's New York residence. We know that Lacerda
was going to Epstein 's home when she was 14, and it is possible that she was going there as early
as 13. This trip is contingent upon approval from the Justice Department of our immunity request
for Lacerda. Yesterday I spoke with someone at the Witness Immunity Unit who stated that we
'I may decide to stay in New York on Friday night in order to see a college friend. If I do,
I will pay for the hotel room on Friday night and any difference in the airfares.
EXHIBIT B-132
Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-008379
should have the approval by early next week.'
In addition, a witness here in the Palm Beach area came forward recently to inform the FBI
about a link between Epstein and the MC Modeling Agency. The witness stated that Epstein and
the head of MC2 , Jean Luc Brunel , worked together to obtain fraudulent visas to bring potential
models to the United States. The witness stated that Epstein selected some of the underage girls to
come to the United States even though Brunel never intended to use them as models so that Epstein
could engage in sexual activity with them. Brunel 's name appears on several of the message pads
recovered during the search of Epstein 's home. Some of the messages describe young girls that he
would like Epstein to meet (including a I6-year-old who would "teach Russian " to Epstein ). The
FBI previously tried to interview Brunel , but he refused to speak with them. The Palm Beach
witness has told the FBI that a former MC2 employee is willing to speak with the FBI about the
fraud .
Yesterday, the FBI in New York arrested two Bear Stearns employees for securities fraud
related to Bear Stearns hedge funds involved in the subprime loan crisis. Epstein has been reported
as one of the creators of those hedge funds in financial news sources. The agents here are contacting
the New York agents to determine if Epstein is a target/subject of the New York investigation and
also to find out whether the two employees are cooperating and would be willing to speak with us.
For the foregoing reasons, I recommend that the Office approve the costs of a hotel room and
a flight for my travel to New York.
'-Travel plans will not be made until the immunity is confirmed.
-2-
Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-008380
‘A0/10 (Ho 04/07)Suboxra Co Testify Before Grand Any
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TO:
SUBPOENA TO TESTIFY
BEFORE GRAND JURY 01.1031MPB1-Tues. No. OLY-05/2
SUBPOENA FOR:
e PERSON I DOCUMENT(S) OR OBJECTS)
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to appear and terrify before the Grand Jury of the United States District
Court at the place, date, and lime specified below,
PLACE
United States District Court
701 Clematis Street
West Palm Beach . Florida 33401
COURTROOM Grand Jury Room
DATE AND TIME
71112008 10:30 am
YOU ARE ALSO COMMANDED to bring with you the following document(s) or object(s):*
ALL DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION REFERENCED IN THE ATTACHMENT TO THIS SUBPOENA.
U Please see additional information on rei •
This subpoena shall remain in elf
behalf of the court.
This subpoena is issued on application
or the of A
• Ilea applicable. eat 'none"
In by the cowl or by an officer acting on
NAME ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF ASSISTANT U S ATTORNEY
AnnMarie C. Villaf aria , Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , Florida 33401-6235
Tel (561) 820.8711, ext 3047
Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-008381
ATTACHMENT TO GRAND JURY SLBPOENA OLY-85/I
ADDRESSED TO
PLEASE BRINGTHE. FOLLOWING DOCUM ENTS, FILMS, AND INFORMATION WITH YOU
TO YOUR GRAND JURY APPEARANCE:
1. Any and all notes, letters, cards, ifts, a ments, hoto ra hs, or other items that u
"' received from Jeffrey Epstein ,
Lesley Groff , Ghislaine Maxwell . and/or any other employee or associate o Je rey Epstein .
2. An and all hot a hs, whether printed or di ital, ofJeffrey Epstein ,
. Cecilia Steen , Ghislaine Maxwell , and/or any
other employee or associate o Jeffrey Epstein .
3. Any and all e-mails, instant messages, chats, text messages, voiccmails or tele hone
10111t received from Jeffrey Epstein .
. Lesley Groff , Ghislaine Maxwe a or any of r
employee or associate o Je rey Epstein .
4. A list of all telephone numbers (cellular and "land line"), c-mail addresses, screen
names, addresses, and any other contact information that you have for the following persons during
the period of January I, 2003 to the present:
a. yourself;
b. Jeffrey Epstein ;
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h. Ghislaine Maxwell ;
i. any person(s) who introduced you to Jeffrey Epstein and/or Ghislaine
Maxwell ;
any person(s) whom you introduced to Jeffrey Epstein and/or Ghislaine
Maxwell ;
k. any person(s) who communicated with you to arrange appointments to meet
with Jeffrey Epstein and/or Ghislaine Maxwell .
5. Any billing statements for telephone service (cellular and "land line") for any
telephone you used during the period of January I, 2003 to the present.
Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-008382
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Fernandez, Aida I. (USAFLS ) <afernandez@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 9:23 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Grand Jury on 6/26 and 7/1
Ok - got it - thx
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 9:19 AM
To: Fernandez, Aida I. (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Grand Jury on 6/26 and 7/1
Hi Aida. Thank you for asking. We will be presenting the witness testimony after the indictment. (I would like
to do the indictment in the morning and the witness in the afternoon, if possible.)
A. Marie Villafaiia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Fernandez, Alda I. (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 9:18 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Grand Jury on 6/26 and 7/1
I assume you will be presenting your witness testimony first? Pls advise so that I know the order in which to
present them next week.
Pls advise.
Thx.
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 9:09 AM
To: Fernandez, Aida I. (USAFLS )
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS )
Subject: Grand Jury on 6/26 and 7/1 EXHIBIT B-133
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014979
Hi Aida — I think you already have this, but, if not:
Can you put me down for a half-hour on Thursday, 6/26, in the morning, for an indictmen-
And, on 7/1 can I have 2 hours in the morning for an indictment on Operation Leap Year. Witness will be
Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, FBI . It will be sealed.
Also on 7/1, I will need 2 hours for witness testimony on Operation Leap Year. Witness will be
Thank you!
A. Marie Villafafia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014980
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1. 11
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ); Kuyrkendall, E N. (MM) (FBI ); Richards, Jason R. (MM)
(FBI )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Trip to New York, etc.
Ok. Marie, hoping to hear from DAG's office today giving the green light. Let's talk when that decision is
made.
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 9:15 AM
To: Kuyrkendall, E N. (FBI ); Richards, Jason R. (FBI )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Subject: Trip to New York, etc.
We will not be interviewing in New York. Her attorney gave a copy of the grand jury subpoena to
Epstein 's lawyers . They, in turn, promptly sent it on to Washington complaining, yet again, about me. So, I do
not want to do an interview with him present, and we will have to put her in the grand jury .
Given that, let's take the New York section out of the indictment so we can present the indictment Tuesday
morning. Then we can do interview in the afternoon with plans to supersede. It probably makes sense
to wait on the rest of the interviews until we hear whadMI has to say, so let's plan to do the New York trip
in a few weeks.
Bob — I will revise everything accordingly and send it down to you. We have another girl from Florida , so I
will replace our New York Jane Doe with her.
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014981
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Brendan White <brendan@whiwhi.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:38 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Ms. Villafana :
I understand that there has been a recent development with respect to Mr. Epstein in that he intends to plead guilty in
Florida state court on Monday pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement with your office that has already been
executed. Since this would seem to obviate any need for Ms. Lacerda to testify, please let me know what is going on with
respect to this Tuesday. Do we still need to come down there and, if so, will she receive court-ordered
immunity? Thanks.
Brendan White
--- Original Message --
From: Vilfacana. Ahn Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Brendan White
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:09 PM
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
Please feel free to make your own travel arrangements, but if you would like Ms. Lacerda's travel costs to be
reimbursed, they must be made through the government's approved agency on the approved carriers.
Regarding the immunity, at this point, without a written proffer from you regarding the substance of her
anticipated testimony , I believe that the more prudent course will be to question Ms. Lacerda to determine the
limits of her Fifth Amendment exposure and, if necessary, to apply to the Court at that time. If you provide me
with a written proffer that summarizes her anticipated testimony and explains how she will be exposed to
criminal liability, then I can make the motion ahead of time. Your written statement would be treated as an
attorney statement made in the course of confidential plea discussions and related negotiations, and would be
governed by Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(0 and Fed. R. Evid. 410.
A. Marie Wolin
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 3340]
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White [mailto:brendan@whiwhl.com]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:45 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc Ball, Shawn (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
We will be there, and I will make the travel arrangements. I am assuming that this will be done in connection with an
order of immunity. Please let me know if that is correct so I can advise Ms. Lacerda. Thanks.
Brendan White 08-80736-CV-MARRA
P-014991
EXHIBIT B-I34
— Original Message ---
From: Villafana . Arm Marie C. (USAFLS1
To: Brendan White
Cc: Ball Shawn (USARSI
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:27 AM
Subject: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
Ms. Lacerda will need to appear before the grand jury on July 1m to give testimony . Please contact my
assistant, Shawn Ball, at 561 820-8711 , ext. 3037, to make travel arrangements. I expect that Ms. Lacerda's
testimony will begin either in the late morning or early afternoon, but she should be available for the whole
day.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafaiia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014992
l's
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ) <Avillafana@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:55 AM
To: Brendan White
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
If Mr. Epstein enters a guilty plea in accordance with that agreement on Monday, then the subpoena will be
withdrawn. At this point, I have not received confirmation that the change of plea is going to occur, nor have I
received information confirming that the plea will be in conformance with our agreement. As such, at this time,
1 still intend to present Ms. Lacerda's testimony to the grand jury on Tuesday. With respect to the immunity
question, I refer you to my e-mail of June 2314, which is shown below.
If the situation changes, I will contact you.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafaiia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White [mailto:brendan@whiwhl.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:38 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Ms. Villafana :
I understand that there has been a recent development with respect to Mr. Epstein in that he intends to plead guilty in
Florida state court on Monday pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement with your office that has already been
executed. Since this would seem to obviate any need for Ms. Lacerda to testify, please let me know what is going on with
respect to this Tuesday. Do we still need to come down there and, if so, will she receive court-ordered
immunity? Thanks.
Brendan White
--- Original Message ---
From: Villafana . AM Marie C. (USAFLS ).
To: Brendan White
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:09 PM
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
Please feel free to make your own travel arrangements, but if you would like Ms. Lacerda's travel costs to be
reimbursed, they must be made through the government's approved agency on the approved carriers.
08-80736-CV-MARRA
P-014993
Regarding the immunity, at this point, without a written proffer from you regarding the substance of her
anticipated testimony , I believe that the more prudent course will be to question Ms. Lacerda to determine the
limits of her Fifth Amendment exposure and, if necessary, to apply to the Court at that time. If you provide me
with a written proffer that summarizes her anticipated testimony and explains how she will be exposed to
criminal liability, then f can make the motion ahead of time. Your written statement would be treated as an
attorney statement made in the course of confidential plea discussions and related negotiations, and would be
governed by Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(0 and Fed. R. Evid. 410.
A. Marie Villafalla
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White [rnailto:brendan@whiwhl.com]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:45 PM
To: Villafana , Ann Made C. (USAFIS )
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
We will be there, and I will make the travel arrangements. I am assuming that this will be done in connection with an
order of immunity. Please let me know if that is correct so I can advise Ms. Lacerda. Thanks.
Brendan White
Original Message --
From: Villifena. Ann Mane C. (USAFLS )
To: Brendan White
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:27 AM
Subject: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
N t
Ms. Lacerda will need to appear before the grand jury on July In to give testimony . Please contact my
assistant, Shawn Ball, at 561 820-8711 , ext. 3037, to make travel arrangements. I expect that Ms. Lacerda's
testimony will begin either in the late morning or early afternoon, but she should be available for the whole
day.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafafia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014994
I I Fax 561 820-8777
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014995
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Brendan White <brendan@whiwhi.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 11:26 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
Thanks.
---- Original Message ---
From: Villafana . Anny.Matie C. (USAFLS )
To: Brendan White
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:55 AM
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
•
If Mr. Epstein enters a guilty plea in accordance with that agreement on Monday, then the subpoena will be
withdrawn. At this point, 1 have not received confirmation that the change of plea is going to occur, nor have I
received information confirming that the plea will be in conformance with our agreement. As such, at this
time, I still intend to present Ms. Lacerda's testimony to the grand jury on Tuesday. With respect to the
immunity question, I refer you to my e-mail of June 23rd, which is shown below.
If the situation changes, I will contact you.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White [mailto:brendan@whiwhi.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:38 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Ms. Villafana :
I understand that there has been a recent development with respect to Mr. Epstein in that he intends to plead guilty in
Florida state court on Monday pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement with your office that has already been
executed. Since this would seem to obviate any need for Ms. Lacerda to testify, please let me know what is going on
with respect to this Tuesday. Do we still need to come down there and, if so, will she receive court-ordered
immunity? Thanks.
Brendan White
-- Original Message --
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS1
To: Brendan White
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:09 PM
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance 08-80736-CV- MARRA P-014996
Dear Mr. White:
Please feel free to make your own travel arrangements, but if you would like Ms. Lacerda's travel costs to be
reimbursed, they must be made through the government's approved agency on the approved carriers.
Regarding the immunity, at this point, without a written proffer from you regarding the substance of her
anticipated testimony , I believe that the more prudent course will be to question Ms. Lacerda to determine the
limits of her Fifth Amendment exposure and, if necessary, to apply to the Court at that time. If you provide
me with a written proffer that summarizes her anticipated testimony and explains how she will be exposed to
criminal liability, then I can make the motion ahead of time. Your written statement would be treated as an
attorney statement made in the course of confidential plea discussions and related negotiations, and would be
governed by Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(1) and Fed. R. Evid. 410.
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White [mallto:brendan@whiwhi.com)
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:45 PM
To: VIllafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
We will be there, and I will make the travel arrangements. I am assuming that this will be done in connection with an
order of immunity. Please let me know if that is correct so I can advise Ms. Lacerda. Thanks.
Brendan White
— Original Message ---
Villarana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Brendan White
Cc: Ball. Shawn (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:27 AM
Subject: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
A*.
Ms. Lacerda will need to appear before the grand jury on July 1St to give testimony . Please contact my
assistant, Shawn Ball, at 561 820-8711 , ext. 3037, to make travel arrangements. I expect that Ms. Lacerda's
testimony will begin either in the late morning or early afternoon, but she should be available for the whole
day.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafafla
Assistant U.S. Attorney
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014997
10$
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014998
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Brendan White <brendan@whiwhi.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:00 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
I've learned from Mr. Epstein 's attorney that the plea is scheduled to take place on Monday morning. In understand, of
course, that you need confirmation of this before withdrawing the subpoena, but it might make logistical sense to consider
putting the contingent appearance off for another week at this point, to avoid our having to make an unnecessary trip to
Florida . Although I am confident that things will proceed as scheduled, should there be a problem, we would then be able
to appear at a later date.
Brendan White
Original Message ---
FrcimiVillafand: ArineMorie,C. tUSAR.S1.4..
To: Brendan White
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:55 AM
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
If Mr. Epstein enters a guilty plea in accordance with that agreement on Monday, then the subpoena will be
withdrawn. At this point, I have not received confirmation that the change of plea is going to occur, nor have I
received information confirming that the plea will be in conformance with our agreement. As such, at this
time, 1 still intend to present Ms. Lacerda's testimony to the grand jury on Tuesday. With respect to the
immunity question, I refer you to my e-mail of June 23Id, which is shown below.
If the situation changes, I will contact you.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafafla
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White (mallto:brendan@whiwhi.com)
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:38 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Ms. Villafana :
I understand that there has been a recent development with respect to Mr. Epstein in that he intends to plead guilty in
Florida state court on Monday pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement with your office that has already been
executed. Since this would seem to obviate any need for Ms. Lacerda to testify, please let me know what is going on
with respect to this Tuesday. Do we still need to come down there and, if so, will she receive court-ordered
immunity? Thanks.
08-80736-CV-MARRA
P-014999
Brendan White
-- Original Message --
;From: Villafana, Ann Marie .C. fUSAFLSI
To: prendan White
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:09 PM
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
Please feel free to make your own travel arrangements, but if you would like Ms. Lacerda's travel costs to be
reimbursed, they must be made through the government's approved agency on the approved carriers.
Regarding the immunity, at this point, without a written proffer from you regarding the substance of her
anticipated testimony , I believe that the more prudent course will be to question Ms. Lacerda to determine the
limits of her Fifth Amendment exposure and, if necessary, to apply to the Court at that time. If you provide
me with a written proffer that summarizes her anticipated testimony and explains how she will be exposed to
criminal liability, then 1 can make the motion ahead of time. Your written statement would be treated as an
attorney statement made in the course of confidential plea discussions and related negotiations, and would be
governed by Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(0 and Fed. R. Evid. 410.
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White imallto:brendanOwhlwhl.com]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:45 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
We will be there, and I will make the travel arrangements. I am assuming that this will be done in connection with an
order of immunity. Please let me knoie if that is correct so I can advise Ms. Lacerda. Thanks.
Brendan White
-- Original Message -
From: Villeanie. Ann Mile C. (USAFISI
To: Brendan White
Cc: Ball. Shawn fUSAFLS)
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:27 AM
Subject: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
k t •
Ms. Lacerda will need to appear before the grand jury on July 1st to give testimony . Please contact my
assistant, Shawn Ball, at 561 820-8711 , ext. 3037, to make travel arrangements. I expect that Ms. Lacerda's
testimony will begin either in the late morning or early afternoon, but she should be available for the whole
day.
Thank you. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-015000
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
4+,
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-015001
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ) <AVillafana@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 6:41 PM
To: Brendan White
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
I have not received any such confirmation. At this time, we are still on for July 1m. I recommend that you make
your travel plans for Monday afternoon or evening and if things change, I will call you right away.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White [mailto:brendan@whiwhi.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:00 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
I've learned from Mr. Epstein 's attorney that the plea is scheduled to take place on Monday morning. In understand, of
course, that you need confirmation of this before withdrawing the subpoena, but it might make logistical sense to consider
pulling the contingent appearance off for another week at this point, to avoid our having to make an unnecessary trip to
Florida . Although I am confident that things will proceed as scheduled, should there be a problem, we would then be able
to appear at a later date.
Brendan White
---- Original Message ----
FrormtVillefina, Aim Marie C. (USAE.LSr:.:
To: Brendan White
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 200810:55 AM
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
If Mr. Epstein enters a guilty plea in accordance with that agreement on Monday, then the subpoena will be
withdrawn. At this point, I have not received confirmation that the change of plea is going to occur, nor have I
received information confirming that the plea will be in conformance with our agreement. As such, at this
time, I still intend to present Ms. Lacerda's testimony to the grand jury on Tuesday. With respect to the
immunity question, I refer you to my e-mail of June 23id, which is shown below.
If the situation changes, I will contact you.
Thank you.
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-015002
A. Marie Villain&
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White [malito:brendan@whlwhl.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:38 AM
To: Vlllafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Ms. Villafana :
I understand that there has been a recent development with respect to Mr. Epstein in that he intends to plead guilty in
Florida state court on Monday pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement with your office that has already been
executed. Since this would seem to obviate any need for Ms. Lacerda to testify, please let me know what is going on
with respect to this Tuesday. Do we still need to come down there and, if so, will she receive court-ordered
immunity? Thanks.
Brendan White
Original Message --
Freim: Vil Ana &Wert (USAFLS )
To: Brendan White
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:09 PM
Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
Please feel free to make your own travel arrangements, but if you would like Ms. Lacerda's travel costs to be
reimbursed, they must be made through the government's approved agency on the approved carriers.
Regarding the immunity, at this point, without a written proffer from you regarding the substance of her
anticipated testimony , I believe that the more prudent course will be to question Ms. Lacerda to determine the
limits of her Fifth Amendment exposure and, if necessary, to apply to the Court at that time. If you provide
me with a written proffer that summarizes her anticipated testimony and explains how she will be exposed to
criminal liability, then I can make tte motion ahead of time. Your written statement would be treated as an
attorney statement made in the course of confidential plea discussions and related negotiations, and would be
governed by Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(0 and Fed. R. Evid. 410.
A. Marie Villafafia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Brendan White (mailto:brendan@whiwhi.com]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:45 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-015003
We will be there, and I will make the travel arrangements. I am assuming that this will be done in connection with an
order of immunity. Please let me know if that is correct so I can advise Ms. Lacerda. Thanks.
Brendan White
---- Original Message ---
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Brendan White
Cc: Ball, Shawn (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 200811:27 AM
Subject: Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White:
Ms. Lacerda will need to appear before the grand jury on July l g to give testimony . Please contact my
assistant, Shawn Ball, at 561 820-8711 , ext. 3037, to make travel arrangements. 1 expect that Ms. Lacerda's
testimony will begin either in the late morning or early afternoon, but she should be available for the whole
day.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villajaiia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-015004
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Brendan White [brendan@whiwhi.com)
Sent: Monday. June 30. 2008 11:20 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Cancellation of Grand Jury Appearance
Thank you for letting me know. I will inform Ms. Lacerda.
Brendan
-- Original Message ---
From: Villafana . Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Brendan White
Cc: Ball. Shawn (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 10:59 AM
Subject: Cancellation of Grand Jury Appearance
Dear Mr. White: At this time, the subpoena of Ms. Lacerda is withdrawn. If that should change, I will contact
you.
A. Mark Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
EXHIBIT B-135
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 7:33 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
Subject: Epstein
Hi Jeff and Alex — We just finished interviewing three of the girls . I wish you could have been there to see how
much this has affected them.
One girl broke down sobbing so that we had to stop the interview twice within a 20 minute span. She regained
her composure enough to continue a short time, but she said that she was having nightmares about Epstein
coming after her and she started to break down again, so we stopped the interview.
The second girl , who has a baby girl of her own, told us that she was very upset about the 18 month deal she
had read about in the paper. She said that 18 months was nothing and that she had heard that the girls could get
restitution, but she would rather not get any money and have Epstein spend a significant time in jail.
The FBI 's victim-witness coordinator attended and she has arranged for counseling for several of the girls .
Please reach out to Alice to make her decision. These girls deserve so much better than they have received so
far, and I hate feeling that there is nothing I can do to help them.
We have four more girls coming in tomorrow. Can I persuade you to attend?
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Tracking: EXHIBIT
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014573
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, March 19. 2008 2:30 PM
To: Weinstein, David (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Epstein update
Why is this allowed to continue? Al least put us out of our misery quickly if that is what is going to happen!
A. Marie lillaleala
Assistant 11.5. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave. Suite 400
West Palm Beach . FL 33401
Phone 56 I 209-I 047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Weinstein, David (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 2:29 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Epstein update
Thank you for silently keeping me in the loop.
Outrageous.
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 2:16 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS ); Garcia, Rolando (USAFLS )
Subject: Epstein update
Hi Jeff and Bob — I am hoping that you have an update from Drew. I wanted to fill you in on recent events.
Yesterday we did the first half of the grand jury presentation on the indictment. Many of the grand jurors
expressed thanks for our return. After a break as 1 walked into the room, I overheard one juror telling another
that he had been concerned that we were going to "whitewash" this case and not charge it.
Epstein 's lawyers arc using the civil lawsuits as an excuse to harass a number of the victims. One girl , who is a
scholarship student at a local university, was hauled into the Dean of Students office to be served with a
subpoena for a deposition . It is scheduled for Monday.
A national crime victims service organization has received a grant from the Justice Department to provide legal
representation to victims. They have agreed to provide counsel for our victims. The only problem is that the
lawyers are located in Maryland . But they will try to find pro bono lawyers here to help out.
I also told Bob that one of our victims tried to commit suicide last week. The FBI 's victim-witness coordinator
is doing her best to get counseling for all of our needy victims, but I just can't stress enough how important it is
08-80736-CV-MARRA
EX1 II BIT C-2
P-014781
for these girls to have a resolution in this case. The "please be patient" answer is really wearing thin, especially
when Epstein 's group is still on the attack while we are forced to wait on the sidelines.
Your guidance is needed.
Thank you.
A. Marie Yillafalia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL. 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014782
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 4:34 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS ); Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS ); Garcia,
Rolando (USAFLS )
Cc: Kuyrkendall, E N.
Subject: Victim Subpoena
Ili everyone — I just spoke with the subpoenaed victim. The subpoena was issued in connection with the state
criminal case, which, as you know, doesn't involve most of the victims in our case (including the girl who was
subpoenaed). The state attorney 's office told us from the beginning that their case has been resolved. He is
going to plead to the solicitation of adults for prostitution charge, so this seems to be a clear effort to find out
about our case through the state case.
A. Marie Villain
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Tracking:
1313 EXHIBIT C-3
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014783
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 8:51 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS ); Garcia, Rolando (USAFLS )
Subject: Epstein
Hi all - So sorry to bother you on a Saturday, but I am hoping that I can persuade you to reach out to Drew
about Epstein 's investigators harassing the girls . Nesbitt received a frantic call today about Epstein 's
investigators bothering the parents of one of the victims. According to the victim, he demanded to see the
victim and when he saw her, he told the victim that they had video of the girl and were planning to put it on the
internet. We don't believe that Epstein actually has video of any of the girls , and Nesbitt has calmed the girl
down, but this activity seems to be getting more aggressive. Remember also that Epstein is using the state
criminal case to subpoena depositions of victims in the federal case (who are not part of the state indictment) to
get information about our investigation. These actions do not seem consistent with what Epstein 's attorneys are
supposed to be trying to work out with Drew in DC. Any chance Drew will ask Epstein 's people to call off
their dogs until he makes his decision?
4. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Tracking: 1256
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014790
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 9:43 PM
To: Kuyrkendall, E N.
Subject: Message from Jeff
Hi Nesbitt — I contacted Jeff and Bob about the harassment issue and Jeff also recommended calling the police .
When Twiler calls on Monday can she provide the non-emergency police numbers for the local police
departments where the girls are located and ask them to call the police directly if they are getting harassed? I
think we should be documenting this stuff with someone other than you.
Thank you.
A. Marie Mal -aft
Assistant U.S. Attorney
561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014795
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 4:20 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein
Let's talk before this is sent, please.
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:45 PM
To: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: FW: Jeffrey Epstein
Karen — What do you think?
Hi Jeff and Mau — I just want to again voice my disagreement with promising to have a meeting or having a
meeting with Lefcourt or any other of Epstein 's attorneys. As I mentioned, this is not a case where we will be
sitting down to negotiate whether a defendant will serve one year versus two years of probation. This is a case
where the defendant is facing the possibility of dozens of years of prison time. Just as the defense will defend a
case like that differently than they would handle a probation-type case, we need to handle this case
differently. Part of our prosecution strategy was already disclosed at the last meeting, and I am concerned that
more will be disclosed at a future meeting.
My co-chair, John McMillan, who has prosecuted more of these cases than the rest of us combined and who
actually worked on the drafting of some of the child exploitation statutes, also opposes a meeting. We have
been accused of not being "strategic thinkers" because of our opposition to these meetings, but we are simply
looking at this case as a violent crime prosecution involving stiff penalties rather than as a white collar or public
corruption case where the parties can amicably work out a light sentence.
With respect to the "policy reasons" that Lefcourt wants to discuss, those were already raised in his letter
(which is part of the indictment package) and during his meeting with Andy and myself. Those reasons are: (1)
he wants the Petit policy to trump our ability to prosecute Epstein , (2) this shouldn't be a federal offense, and
(3) the victims were willing participants so the crime shouldn't be prosecuted at all. Unless the Office thinks
that any of those arguments will be persuasive, a meeting will not be beneficial to the prosecution, it will only
benefit the defense. With respect to Lefcourt 's promised legal analysis, that also has already been
provided. The only way to get additional analysis is to expose to the defense the other charges that we are
considering. In my opinion this would seriously undermine the prosecution.
The defense is anxious to have a meeting in order to delay the investigation/prosecution, to find out more about
our investigation, and to use political pressure to stop the investigation.
I have no control over the Office's decisions regarding whether to meet with the defense or to whom the facts
and analysis of the case will be disclosed. However, if you all do decide to go forward with these meetings in a
way that is detrimental to the investigation, then I will have to ask to have the case reassigned to an AUSA who
is in agreement with the handling of the case.
A. Marie Villafaila
Assistant U.S. Attorney
EXHIBIT C-4
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Lourie, Andrew (USAFLS )
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:33 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: FW: Jeffrey Epstein
fyi
From: Lourie, Andrew (USAFLS )
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:32 PM
To: 'Gerald Lefcourt '
Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein
I have your letter. I think we are on the same page, but to be sure I do want to clarify that we spoke the other week and
I did say that if you want to meet with me again, I am ready to do so. The wording of your letter, however, suggests
implicitly that I agreed to contact you before a decision is made to seek an indictment of Mr. Epstein . If that was your
understanding, then please allow me to clarify. Our investigation is ongoing and if we decide to seek an indictment, we
don't intend to call Mr. Epstein 's representatives to let him know that. Of course, in the interim, if you would like to
make a presentation to us, we are willing to listen.
Along those lines, given the fact that we have already met once, with schedules being what they are, it makes sense for
our criminal chief, Matt Menchel , to be included when you make another presentation, rather than working up the
chain incrementally. I realize you were being respectful in not attempting to leapfrog over me, which I appreciate. I
will pass on your request to meet with the U.S. Attorney as well, but can't commit for him one way or another. When
you have some dates in mind, let me know and I will try to set up a meeting in Miami .
From: Gerald Lefcourt [mailto:GBL@lefcourtlaw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 2:05 PM
To: Lourle, Andrew (USAFLS )
Cc: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ); Lilly Ann Sanchez
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein
Andy, attached is a letter seeking meetings, as discussed with you, but with others if it is not resolved. Thanks for your
attention. Could you email back so that I know you have received this letter?
Gerald B. Lefcourt
Gerald B. Lefcourt , P.C.
148 E. 78th Street
New York, New York 10021
.0400
Fax
obkalercourtlaw.com
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Menchel, Matthew (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 10:52 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ); Lourie, Andrew (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Operation Leap Year
Marie,
You will not have approval to go forward tomorrow with an indictment or to poceed by complaint. Alex has your memo
and lefcourt 's letter but he is out of the district at the US Attorney 's conference for the next several days.
I'm having trouble understanding - given how long this case has been pending - what the rush is. This is obviously a very
significant case and alex wants to take his time making sure he is comfortable before proceeding.
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
Original Message
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ) <AVillafana@usa.doj .gov>
To: Lourie, Andrew (USAFLS ) <Alourie@usa.doj .gov>; Menchel, Matthew (USAFLS ) <MMenchel@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Mon May 14 10:38:15 2007
Subject: Operation Leap Year
Good morning: I just received a call that Epstein 's plane is flying from the Virgin Islands to Newark now, so it looks like
Epstein is going to show up for his court appearance tomorrow. Can you let me know if the indictment is going
tomorrow or, if not, whether we are authorized to proceed by Complaint?
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafaha
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
EXHIBIT C-5
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: VIHelena. Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 4:48 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Subject: FW: Proposed Letter to Special Master
Attachments: PROPOSED Letter to Special Master.pdf; Special Master Proposal.pdf; Ltr from Lefkowitz to
Villafana (Oct. 5, 2007)212135690_4)1)OC
li i Jeff Can I please just indict him? Can you give me a call on my cell phone? 561 601-2301 . Since they
object to using a Special Master. we have two options — we can just choose the lawyer ourselves or as part of
our selection process. we can deal with the Special Master ourselves and, upon receiving the Special Master's
choice. provide that name to the defense, understanding that they may then reject the selection.
The other issues, regarding paying the attorney, clearly violate the terms of the agreement, which specifically
state "if any of the individuals elects to file suit."
A. Mark Villafafta
Assistant U.S. Attorney
561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Jay Lefkowitz [mailto:Reficowit@kirkland.com]
Sent: Fri 10/5/2007 11:03 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc: Lourie, Andrew; owlmgw@worldnet.att.net; glewis@lewistein.com
Subject: RE: Proposed Letter to Special Master
Marie.
Attached is a letter responding to your latest proposals. For your convenience, I've also attached your prior e-mails and
attachments regarding this matter so that you can easily see what I am responding to (see the chain below). If you are
available, I'm free to talk at 5:30 this evening. We can use my usual call-in number at (866) 462-0164 . The code is
'4464970'.
Thanks,
Jay
"Villatana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLSr
cAnn.Marie.C.Vifialaniausdoi.00v>
10/05/2007 07 48 AM
To -Jay Letkormts" clletkomMakirkland corny
cc
Subject RE. Proposed Letter to Special Master
EXHIBIT C-6
Good morning, Jay. We need to resolve the attorney issue today. It has been weeks since
execution of the contract, and there is no need for further delay.
As far as the five attorney names that we will be providing, I propose Bert Ocariz,
Katherine Ezell at Podhurst Orseck , Stuart Grossman, Ed Rogers, and Walter Cobath.
If you would like to use the same Special Master to resolve fees disputes as well as to
handle the selection of the attorney, I recommend that w tired 11th Circuit
Judge Joseph Hatchett instead of Judge because of Judge
illie
health problems.
:No one has contacted Judge Hatchett yet, but one of the District udges in Miami
mentioned him as a good choice. )
I am available for a conference call between 9:00 and 10:00, and between 3:15 and 6:00.
Please call me on my cell (561 601-2301 ) and let me know which of those times works best
for you.
Thank you.
From: Jay Lefkowitz (mailto:JLefkowitz@kirkland.com)
Sent: Wed 10/3/2007 4:26 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Proposed Letter tc Special Master
Marie - I, too, am interested in speed. But I really need to go over this and then
discuss with Jeffrey. So please do not send this to any Special Master before we discuss
the next steps.
Thanks -- Jay
"Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )" <Ann.Marie.C.Viliatana@usdoj.gov>
10/03/200 7 04:24 PM
To
"Jay Lefkowitz " <JLefkowitz@kirkland.com>
cc
Subject
Proposed Letter to Special Master
Hi Jay - To move things along, I also have enclosed the proposed text of a letter to the
Special Master.
<<PROPOSED Letter to Special Master.pdf»
A. Marie Villafafla
Assistant "J.S. Attorney
561 209-1047
Fax 561 920-8 77 '7
"ViIlafana, Ann Mario C. (USAFLS ) -
cAnn.Marie.S.Villalanageusdoiciov>
10/03/2007 04 24 PM
To "Jay lentowaz ciLefltovnizattkirkiand corn,
cc
Subject Proposed Letter to Special Master
Hi Jay — To move things along. I also have enclosed the proposed text of a letter to the Special Master.
«PROPOSED Letter to Special Master pdf»
A. Mark Villafaik
Assistant U.S. Attorney
561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
"Vilialana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )"
4Ann,Mario.C.Villaranalausdoickur>
10/03/2007 03 18 PM
To "Jay Lefkowitz " <JLetkomtzrekirsiand corn>
cc
&beset Memo in POF lomat
Hi Jay — In case you can't open the other version, here it is in pdf.
<<Special Master Proposetpdf»
A. Mark Vilkfafia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana . Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 5:58 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Letter from Jay Lefkowitz
Welcome to my world. I love the way that they want to interpret this agreement. First, during the negotiations, I
repeatedly told Jay that we could not bind the girls to Epstein 's desired out-of-court settlement strategy and. therefore. the
agreement could not try to bind them in that way.
The 550,000/S150,000 thing is a complete red herring, and Jay keeps calling it a "limit," when it is actually a floor, not a
ceiling.
It also looks like they are planning to ask for and receive a sentence far lower than the one we agreed to. Has
anyone talked to Barry about this? Maybe this is the real reason for the delay in entering the guilty plea? We
also have to contact the victims to tell me about the outcome of the case and to advise them that an attorney will
be contacting them regarding possible claims against Mr. Epstein . If we don't do that, it may be a violation of
the Florida Bar Rules for the selected attorney to "cold call" the girls .
Their complaint about the 24-year-old concerns me only because their continued dragging out of this matter is
ly going to foreclose other girls . The language of the agreement with Epstein and the letter to Judge i iissib
both refer to persons we have identified as victims as defined in 2255, it says nothing about whether the
gir s claims are necessarily valid. I have no idea whether the girl who currently is 24 either wants to sue
Epstein or has any viable state or other federal claims -- that is why we are TRYING to get them a lawyer . And
they have always known that most of the girls are now over the age of 18 -- goodness -- the time period of the
violations was from 2001 to 2005 and it is now the end of 2007!
Why don't we agree to mutual recission and indict him?
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Tue 10/23/2007 5:13 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: FW: Letter from Jay Lefkowitz
Wait to you see this one.
From: Jay Lefkowitz (mailto:JLefkowitz@kirkland.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 4:57 PM
To: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
Cc: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Subject: Letter from Jay Lefkowitz
Dear Alex and Jeff,
Here is my response to Jeffs email from late yesterday.
Please let me know if you want to speak later this evening. I am also available any time tomorrow.
2687 EXHIBIT C-7
Thanks -- Jay
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney -client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only tor
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
Kirkland & Ellis LLP or Kirkland 6 Ellis International LLP.
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to postmastetikirkland.com, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments.
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Sloman. Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 5:26 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ); Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
Subject: Fw: Epstein
Fyi
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
Original Message
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
To: 'flefkowitz@kirkland.com. <JLefkowitz@kirkland.com>
Sent: Mon Oct 22 17:23:30 2007
Subject: Re: Epstein
I l
I have not spoken to him b ' was our intention to assign the decision to
select a lawyer to Judge not for him to represent the girls . We do not
want to select the lawyer w o l represents the girls . I don't know who said he'd do
it but it wasn't us.
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
Original Message
From: Jay Lefkowitz <JLefkowitz@kirkland.com>
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Cc: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS ); Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Mon Oct 22 17:10:00 2007
Subject: Re: Epstein
Jeff -- I will review these materials this evening and be in touch with you
tomorrow with the expectation of wrapping this up by nd of the day. One
question I have, however, is why you say that Judge is a non-starter. I
understood that he was ready, willing and able to serve as the attorney
representative. If you have had conversations with him and that is not the case,
please let me know.
I will go over the other issues you raise in your email and will look forward to
speaking tomorrow.
Thanks -- Jay
"Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )" <]eff.Sloman@usdoj.gov>
10/22/2007 04:40 PM
To
"Jay Lefkowitz " <JLefkowitz@kirkland.com> cc
"Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )" cAlex.Acosta @usdoj.gov>, "Villafana, Ann Marie C.
(USAFLS )" <Ann.Marie.C.Villafana @usdoj.gov> Subject
Epstein
Jay,
The Judge issue is a non-starter. We've beaten that horse to death.
Regarding your contention that "the attorney representative be told clearly that
Mr. Epstein has agreed to pay the lawyer 's hourly rate only for the time he or
she spends working to effectuate settlements for the identified women," Alex and
I agree that paragraph 7C is sufficient, Regarding the other points, we have
made the following concessions:
1. Regarding the language concerning a lawyer whose firm is
sizeable enough to litigate multiple trials simultaneously, I have removed
paragraph 4 on page 3 of the letter.
2. Regarding the 150k statutory limit language, I have included a
footnote which should satisfy your concern.
3. Regarding language there may be discovery to test the claims
of alleged "victims", please see new paragraph 4 on page 3 which now states as
criteria that the firm should have "Experience litigating against large law firms
and high profile attorneys who may test the veracity of the victims' claims."
I have attached the Addendum and the revised letter to Judge Jay, this
needs to be concluded. Alex and I believe that this is as far w can go.
Therefore, please advise me whether we have a deal no later than COB tomorrow,
Tuesday , October 23, 2007. Thanks,
Jeff
Original Message
From: Jay Lefkowitz [mailto:]Lefkowitz@kirkland.com ]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 4:05 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Subject: Re:
Jeff -
I have reviewed your proposed language and wanted to raise a few areas of
concern.
First, I am not sure why we are not just asking Judge to represent these
women. If he is available, that would save us a whole a itional layer of
process. I had thought that was initially the idea. I am not sure why you seem
to be moving in another direction.
I also cannot understand why the draft affirmatively requests that J select
a lawyer whose firm is sizeable enough to litigate multiple trials
simultaneously. That seems to be directly at odds with the purpose of the
agreement, which is to facilitate out of court settlements. Indeed, to the
extent any woman were to elect to bring an action against Mr. Epstein , she would
not only be free to select any lawyer of her choice, but would be restricted from
using the lawyer representative in this capacity due to the conflicts of
interests that would cause. This part of your proposed language is of
signficiant concern to me.
Your letter also indicates the 150k statutory limit without reference to the
pre-existing 50G limit. To be sure, any of the women are free to seek whatever
settlement they want, but given the question that exists about the statutory
amount, the letter should not state definitely that it will be 150k.
In addition have omitted a few important items from your proposal. Given
that Judge or any other potential attorney representative should understand
the scope o e work, the language should make clear that there may be discovery
to test the claims of alleged "victims."
Finally, I think it is important that the attorney representative be told clearly
that Mr. Epstein has agreed to pay the lawyer 's hourly rate only for the time he
or she spends working to effectuate settlements for the identified women.
Jay
Original Message
From: "Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )" [Jeff.Sloman@usdoj.gov]
Sent: 10/17/2007 01:58 PM AST
To: Jay Lefkowitz
Subject: RE:
<<071015 Special Master Letter2.wpd» Jay,
Here's our proposed letter to the special master.
Jeff
Original Message
From: Jay Lefkowitz [mailto:JLefkowitz@kirkland.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 9:26 AM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Subject:
Jeff - is there a time today we can speak?
How about 430 pm?
***********************************************************
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 the property of
Kirkland & Ellis LLP or Kirkland & Ellis International LLP.
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to postmaster@kirkland.com, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments.
#4********#4 , ###tt4c#4***********####*********************###
#********####4 , 4, **************###*t#ti,*#*#44 , *********4.44.44 2k#
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 the property of
Kirkland & Ellis LLP or Kirkland & Ellis International LLP.
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to postmaster@kirkland.com, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments.
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MARIE VILLAFANA
Exhibit # Date Description
I 5/1/2006 Letter from Chief Rcitcr to State Attorney Krischer
2 5/23/2006 File Opening Documents
7/3/2007 -
7/13/2007
Emails between Criminal Chief Matt Menchel and AUSA Villafaiia regarding plea
negotiations.
4 7/31/2007 Tenn Sheet for Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement
5 Undated File folder entitled 'Meeting Timeline' with contents
6 7/24/2006 Letter from Chief Reiter to victims informing them of FBI investigation
7 7/26/2006 South Florida Sun-Sentinel Article Regarding Chief Reiter 's referral of case to FBI
8 8/2/2007
Lilly Ann Sanchez email to Matt Menchel with attached letter containing counter-
proposal for plea to two years of 'supenised custody.'
8/24/2006 -
10/24/2006 Entails betweenJim Eisenberg and Marie Villafana regarding #28
10/30/2006 -
10/31-2006
Emails between Marie Vitt:liana and Guy Lewis regarding Lewis respresentation
of Epstein
II
11/8/2006 -
I/8/2007
Emails between Marie Villatana and Lilly Ann Sanchez regarding Sanchets
representation of Epstein
12 8/4/2006 Victim Notification Letters
13 WI1/2006 Victim Notification Letters
1/17/07 -
2/1/07
Correspondence between Lilly Ann Sanchez , Gerald Lelcourt, Andrew Laurie,
A. Marie Villafrina, and John McMillan regarding 2/1/2007 Meeting
11/13/06 -
1/22/07 Subpoenas to Adrian Mucinska and research re 6001 immunity
16 9/26/2006 Memo regarding Changes to Child Exploitation Statutes in Tide 18
17 2/6/2007 Transcript of Kuyrkendall Testimony
18 2/27/2007 Transcript of Kuyrkendall Testimony
19 3/15/2007 Victim Notification Letter
20 3/20/2007 Transcript of Kuyrkendall Testimony
21 4/24/2007 Transcript of Kiwrkendall Testimony
22 4/24/2007 ' I 't a irseript of #37 Testimony
23 5/8/2007 Presentation Materials
24 5/8/2007 Transcript of Kuyrkendall Testimony
25 5/8/2007 Transcript of Richards Testimony
5/14/07 -
5/21/07 Emats between Andrew Laurie, Mau MencheLjeff Sloman, mid Marie Villakula
27 5/15/2007 Transcript of Kuyrkendall Testimony
5/22/07 -
5/24/07
Emails between Andrew Laurie, Gerald Lel-court, Man Mencheljeff Sloman,
Marie Villafaiia, Lilly Ann Sanchez , and Karen Atkinson regarding second
meeting with counsel for Epstein
29 5/22/2007 Transcript of Kuyrkendall Testimony
30 6/7/2007 Victim Notification Letters
6/14/07 -
6/21/07
Entails between Marie Villafaiia, Karen Atkinson, Andrew Laurie, Mau Menchel ,
and Jeff Martian regarding addendum to Pros Memo, grand jury presentation,
changes to indictmer it. and meeting with counsel for Epstein .
32 6/25/2007
Letter from Gerald I efcourt tojeffrey Montan and Andrew Laurie regarding
6/26/2007 meeting and emails and notes regarding same.
PRIVILEGED and CONFII)ENTIAL Page 1 of 10 CONTAINS 6(c) MATERIAL
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MARIE VILLAFANA
Exhibit 41 Date Description
33 7/6/2007
Letter from Gerald l.efcourt and Alan Dershonia toJeffrey Sloman and Andrei
Londe arguing against federal prosecution.
34 7/13/2007 Letter from Roy Black to Marie Villa' la with handwritten attorney Lourie notes
35 7/25/2007
latter from Gerald l.efrourt and Alan Dershowia to Matthew Menchel arguing
that no charge can or should be made under 18 U.S.C. S 2422(b).
36 7/26/2007
Email from Marie ViIlafaria to Matt Menchel and Andrew Lourie regarding
proposed changes to indictment.
7/27/2007 -
8/8/2007 Research regarding 18 U.S.C. S 2255
38 7/81/2007
Email from Marie ViKaiak toJeff Molnar], Man Menchel , and Andrew Lourie
summarizing proposed plea terms as per Menchel recommendation
7/81/07 -
8/3/07
7/31/2007 .8/3/2007 Entails between Jeff Montan, Matt Moretti, Andrew Louric,
and Marie VilLafaria regarding plea negotiations, including draft response to
Nutter counsel regarding proposed agreement
40 8/2/2007
Letter front Lilly Ann Sanchez to Matthew Menchel containing counter-proposal
of 2 years' supervised custody with two additional years of probation and internal
correspondence regarding same.
I I 8/3/2007
Letter from Matthew Menchel to Lilly Ann Sanchez rejecting counterproposal,
setting a deadline of 8/17/2007 , and advising that LISA Acosta was not inclined to
meet with counsel for Epstein , and internal entails regarding same.
I.? 8/6/2007
Entails from Marie Villafaila to Cyndee Campos, Frederica Devlin, and Jeff
Sloman to determine whether Malt Matchers 8/3/2007 letter went out before he
resigned from the U.S. Attorney 's Office.
43 8/7/2007
Entails between Drew Oosterbaan, Andrew Laurie, Marie Villafafia, Alex Acosta ,
Jeff Slontan, and Cyndee Campos regarding request front Epstein 's counsel for
meeting with CEOS and background of case
l 1.
9/4/07 -
9/6/07
Entails betweenJeff Molnar', Marie Villafak, Andrew Laurie, Drew Oosterbaan,
and Rolando Garcia regarding planned meeting with Epstein defense team and
need to confer with victims.
I. 9/10/2007
Entails betweenJeff Sloman, Marie Villafafia,John McMillan, and Andrew
Larne regarding USA Acosia's inquiry regarding the state grand jury investigation
IS
9/10/07 -
9/19/07
Entails between Alex Acosta , Jeff Montan, Andrew Laurie, Rolando Garcia,
Karen Atkinson, Marie Villafafia, andJohn McMillan regarding plea negotiations
9/10/07 -
9/11/07
Entails from Marie Viktoria to Gerakl I cfcourt with proposed Non-Prosecution
Apvements
PI
9/11/07 -
9/13/07
Entails between Marie Vilkdafia and Drew Oosterbaan regarding proposed Non-
Prosecution Agreement, including research on proposed tnist fund.
9/ 1 2/2007-
9/24/2007 Entails between Marie Villafidia and Jay I.elkowitz re plea negotiations
50 9/21/2007 Research re Florida Statutes
51 9/23/2007 Entails between Alex Acosta and Jay Lelkowitz re pica negotiations
PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. Page 2 of 10 CONTAINS G(e) MATERIAL
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MARIE VILLAFANA
Exhibit (t Date Description
52 9/24/2007 Signed non-prosecution agreement
53 6/18/2007 Letter to Gerald Lefcourt re subpoena to NES, LLC and Jute 26, 2007 meeting
54 5/21/2007 Email regarding guidance on grand jury presentation
55 12/3/2007
Entails from Marie VillafaLfia to Alex Acosta regarding research on proposed trust
fund.
56 3/22/2007
Entails between Marie Villafafia and IRS supervisor regarding money laundering
research
57 Case regarding nunicy laundering and aiding & abetting
58 2/12/2007
Entails between l'illafafia and Lilly Ann Sanchez regarding employee
representation with Lourie and Villafafia handwritten notes
59 5/21/2007 Subpoena to Paul A. Lavery
60 6/18/2007 Subpoena to Witham Riley
61 «18/2007 Subpoena to Riley Kiraly
62 7/18/2007
Email from Villafaita to Matt Menthe! regarding Roy Black objection to
subpoenas addressed to William Riley and Riley Kiraly
63 7/19/2007 Entails between A/Malaita, Menthe!, and Loire regarding service of target letters.
64 7/26/2007
Email from Villarafia to Man Menthe) and Andrew Londe regarding
reconunended revisions to indictment
8/1/2007 -
8/2/2007 Entails between Menthe! and Villakdre regarding plea negotiations
66 9/10/2007
Proposed Non-Prosecution Agreement provided to Gerald Leleourt on
9/10/2007
67 9/11/2007
Proposed Non-Prosecution Agreement incorporating Acosta edits provided to
Gerald Lefeourt on 9/11/2007
6/18/2008 -
6/19/2008
Entails between Villafafia, Krischer , Atkinson, Senior, Acosta , Sloman. and
Garcia regarding Epstein 's case with state court and how it might breach the NPA
69 12/14/2007 Draft letter to Kriseher front Acosta regarding Epstein filing as sex oftender
9/16/2008 -
9/17/2008
Entails between Villarafia, Krischer , Belohlavek , Garcia, Sloman, and Atkinson
regarding Palm Beach Daily News requesting copy of the NPA and discussion
71 «30/2008 Entail front Drew Oosterbaan rc Epstein guilty plea
72 11/14/2007
Entail from Villafafia to Stomata regarding meeting with State Attorney 's Office
about work release and sex offender registration
12/6/2007 -
12/7/2007
Entails between Lamm Belohlavek , Marie Villafafia, and Jeff Sloman regarding a
factual proffer for state plea
74 12/14/2007 Email from Villafafia to Acosta and Sloman regarding hl. Stat. 796.03 and 2255.
75 12/14/2007 Email front Villafafia to Acosta with three letters requested by Acosta
11/15/2007 -
11/16/2007
Entails between Richards, Villafafia, Slontan, Garcia, Acosta , and Atkinson
regarding work release
6/27/2008 -
«28/2008
Entails between Vilkifafia, Goklberger, and Black regarding issues with state plea
agreement
78 «17/2008
Entail from Villafaita to Acosta , Sloman, Senior, Atkinson, and Garcia
summarizing meeting with Krischer regarding Epstein 's attempt to negotiate a new
plea deal
PRIVILEGE') and CONFIDENTIAL Page 3 of 10 CONTAINS 6(c) MATERIAL
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MARIE VILLAFANA
&hint # Date Description
79 6/27/2008
Entail from 3rillafaita to Montan summarizing conversation with Goldberger that
Epstein would serve sentence in confinement '24-bouts-a-day
80 6/29/2008 Email from Kuyrkendall to Villafana regarding work release
81 7/3/2008
Email from Villafiula to Sloman providing update on meeting with Col Gauger at
PBSO regarding work release
11/20/2008 .
1 iip2 mow
Entails between Villafafia, Senior, Acosta , Slontan, Atkinson, and Garcia
regarding Epstein work release
83 12/9/2008 Research materials regarding Epstein 's work release application
84 12/11/2008
VilLiana letter to Capt. Sleeth, Palm Beach Sheriffs Office, mganling Epstein 's
work release application
85 6/9/2009
Vadatla Memorandum to Sloman, Senior, Garcia, awl Atkinson seeking
permission to declare breach with attachments awl proposal breach letter
86 6/9/2009 Signed indictment package
87 6/12/2009 Villafaiia letter to Goldberger providing notice of breach of NPA
88 6/15/2009
Villafana letter to Lclkowitz, Black, and Goldberger regarding history of Epstein 's
performance under the NPA
89 6/17(2009
Villafaila letter to Lelkowitz regarding monitoring future performance under the
NPA
90 9/1/2009
Black letter to Montan seeking approval for Epstein to transfer community control
to the Virgin Islands
91 9/18/2009
Villafaila letter to Black explaining Olfwe's concerns about Epstein 's application
for transfer to the Virgin Islands
A-1 Timeline of Events
B-1 Chart addressing Question B.2
11-2 11/19/2007 Plea notification letter datal 11/19/2007
B-3 11/27/2007
Plea notification letter dated 11/27/2007 at 7:11 pm (formatting problem
convening from Word Perfect)
B-4 11/28/2007 Victim notification letter prepared II/28/2007 at 9:42 pm
B-5 12/1/2007 Victim notification letter prepared 12/1/2007 at 7:50 pm
1.6 12/7(2007 Victim notification letter prepared 12/7/2007 at 9:10 pm (formatting problem)
13-7 11/19/2007 Research rc Florida Statute 921.143
B-8 11/28/2007 Email chain between Jay Lelkowitz an dJeff Sloman forwarded to Marie Villaftula
B-9 11/29/2007 Letter from Jay Lelkowitz to Alex Acosta re CVRA - victim notifwation letter
B-10 II/30/2007 Letter from Alex Acosta to Jay Lefkowia rc Victim Notification letter
B-11 12/5/2007
Letter from Ken Starr and Jay I adkowitz to Alex Acosta requesting updated draft
victim letters
B-12 12/6/2007 Letter from Jeff Mont an to Jay Lefkowitz attaching victim notification letter
B-13
12/6/2007 -
12/7/2007 Internal entails about need to notify victims of upcoming plea
PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. Page 4 of 10 CONTAINS 6(c) MKITRIAL
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MANE VILLAFAHA
Exhibit # Dale Description
B-14 12/7/2007 Victim notification letters and envelopes that were never sent
13-15 12/7/2007 Letter from Lilly Ann Sanchez with 1/4/2008 plea date
13-16 12/14/2007
Draft Victim Notification Letter prepared I WI4/2007 at 9:57 pm (formatting
problem)
13-17 12/14/2007
Email from Marie Villafana to Alex Acostadcff Sloman, Rolando Garcia, and
Karen Atkinson with victim letter attached
B-18 12/17/2007
Email from Marie Villafana to Jeff Sloman reiterating concerns about failure to
notify victims
13.19 12/19/2007
Entails between Alex Acosta ,JeffSloman, and Marie Villafafta with draft and final
letter to Lilly Ann Sanchez , including promise not to provide victims with notice
of state change of plea hearing.
13-20 19/11/2007
Email from Marie Villafana toJeff Sloman and Alex Acosta regarding call with
Jim Eisenberg
13.21 12/21/2007 Letter from Jay Lefkowitz to Alex Acosta re wanting to sec victim list
B.22 12/26/2007
Letter from Jay Lelkowitz. to Alex Acosta re right to review victim notification
letter and belief that it should come from State Attorney 's Office
13.23
3/10/2008 .
3/12/2008
Entails regarding Epstein attempts to contact victims and finding counsel for
victims
13-24 5/15/2008
Letter from Drew Oosterbaan toJay Lelkowitz denying challenge to federal
prosecution
13.25 3/14/2008 Revised indictment package
B-26 3/18/2008 Grand jury presentation materials and transcript
13-27 3/14/2008
Entails between Marie Villafana , Rolando Garcia, Karen Atkinson, Frederica
Devlin, and Shawn Ball rc complete indictment package for Robert Senior review
B-28 3/28/2008 Letter from Ken Starr to DAAG SW Mandelker with additional objections
B-29 4/29/2008 Summary chart and outline for grand jury presentation
B-30 4/29/2008 Draft Indictment
15-31
10/9/2007 -
3/25/2008
FBI Interview Reports of— (10/05/2007 , 3/20/2008 , and 3/25/2008 ), #2
(10/10/2007 ), #14 (10/26/2007 ), #33 (10/02/2007 ), #20 (10/25/2007 ), #21
(10/0W2007), - (10/0W2007), — (10/02/2007 ), #40 (6/12/2007 ), and #35
(10/02/2007 )
13-32 5/19/2008
Letter fromMI .310mm toJay Lefkowitz settingJune 2, 2008 deadline to comply
with tenns and conditions of the NPA
5/19/2008 -
512712008 Ken Starr /Whitley letters to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip
13-34
5/27/2008 -
6/13/2008
Internal entails after CEOS letter rejecting appeal where Marie Villafana asks to
indict andJeff/Alex advise Epstein will be given chance to perform
13-35 5/19/2008 Correspondence between Alex Acosta ,Jeff Slomah, and Jay Lelkowitz
1336 5/19/2008 Email from Alex Acosta toJay Lefkowitz responding to Lefkowitz email
1337 5/19/2008
Kirkland & Ellis LIP, Response to letter by FAUSA Sloman dated 5/19/2008 -
10 pages (RFP8)
B-38 5/27/2008
Emails between Bob Senior, Jell Montan, Marie Villafana , and Karen Atkinson
regarding indictment review and no further plea negotiations
B39 5/27/2008
Emails between Marie Villarafia and Karen Atkinson regarding report of new state
pica deal
PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL Page 5 of 10 CONTAINS 6(c) MATERIAL
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MARIE V1LLAFANA
&Wait # Date Description
B-40 5/29/2008
Email from Jell Sloman to Marie Villafafta, Bob Senior, Karen Atkinson, E.
Nesbitt KtnTkendaII, and Jason Richards informing them that l)AG Filip agreed
to review matter and that grand jury presentation was canceled
13-41 8/28/2008
Letter front Michael Danchuk to Marie Villafaila regarding victim representation
and filing suit against Epstein in state court
13-42 4/9/2008 Mai is Villafana letter to Richard II. Willits (formatting problem)
13-43 6/18/2008 Marie Villalana handwritten notes re calls with Brad Ed wards and Roy Black
B-44 6/23/2008 John Roth letter to Kan Starr and Jay Lelkowitt
13-45 6/24/2008 Em.ias between Roy Black , Jack Goldberger , and Marie Villafaiia re wrap up
13-46 6/25/2008
Email from Jcff Montan to Marie Villafafia regarding conversation about 225.5
issue and enui of guilt' plea
1147 6/25/2008
Email from Jeff Sloman to Marie %Adana with attached revised victim
notification letter
13-48 6/25/2008
Entails between Marie Villafaila,JcITSIontan, Bob Senior, Karen Atkinson, and
Alex Acosta regarding draft of notification of victim list for Jeffrey Epstein counsel
with attached drafts
13-49 6/23/2008
Entails betweenJeff Sloman, Bob Senior, and Marie Vitt& instructing Marie
Villafana to inform Epstein 's attorneys that lie had untiLlune 30 to enter a guilty
plea and Villafaita email to Lelkowitz re same.
13-50 6/26/2008 Fax from FBI with final victim list
B-51 6/27/2008 Confirmation from police and Epstein 's counsel of plea on 6/30/2008
13-52 6/27/2008 Email from Villafaiia to Sloman inquiring about conversation with Chief Reiter .
13-53 6/28/2008
Entails between Villafafm andJeff Montan regarding Chief Reiter providing
notifications to victims.
B-54 1W7 /2007
Email fmmJeff Montan to Marie Villafana instructing her not to send victim
notification letter
13-55 6/30/2008
Notes from calls with attonwys M. Danchuk, R. Willits, J. Herman, B. Edwards.
T. Leopokl, and M. Dutko
13,56 6/80/2008 Draft notification of identified victims letters
13-57 7/8/2008 Letter from Marie %Palatal., to Jack Goldberger re victim notification letter
1348 7/8/2008 Letter from Jack Goklberger to Marie Villafaiia that he will respond on 7/9/2008
8.59 7/9/2008
Email from Marie Villafafta to Alex Acosta , Jeff Stoma, and Karen Atkinson re
Goldberger letter
11-60 7/9/2008
letter from Marie Villafana to Jack Goldberger regarding notification of identified
victims
13.61 7/9/2008
Letter fromJack Goldberger to Marie Villafaita re notification of identified
victims
B-62 7/10/2008
Letter front Marie Villafana to Jack Goldberger informing him that victim
notifications will be provided on a rolling basis
11-63 7/10/2008
letter front Marie Villafana to Goldberger with final notification of identified
victims
PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL Page 6 of 10 CONTAINS 6(e) MATERIAL
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MARIE VILLAFANA
Exhibit # Date Description
11-61 7/10/2008 Letter fromJack Goldberger to Marie Villafana requesting list of all victims
11-65 7/10/2008
Email from Jeff Sloman to Marie Villafafta, Alex Acosta , Karen Atkinson, E
Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, and Jason Richards regarding proposed response to Jack
Goldberger
15-66 7/9/2008 Victim Notification Letters to inditiduals #35 and 43
13-67 7/10/2008 Victim Notification Letters to individuals #3, 8, 17, 25, 26, 37, and I I
B-68
7/14/2008 -
7/15/2008
Emails between Marie Villafana , E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall,Jason Richards. and
Twiler Smith re FBI victim notifications
15-69
7/18/2008 -
7/21/2008
Emails between Marie Villafana , Jeff Montan, E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, Jason
Richards, Dexter Lee , and Karen Atkinson rc preparation of victim notificatiot I
letters and victim contact list and victims that Miler still needs to make contact
with
13-70 7/21/2008 Victim Notification Letters to individuals NI, 2, 4, 9, IS, 14, 21, 23, 30, 32, and 38
B-71 8/5/2008
Email from Marie Villafaffa to Alex Acostajeff Montan, Bob Senior, and Karen
Atkinson regarding analysis ofJeffrey Epstein agreement, with attached 6/24/2008
email from A. M. Villafafia to R. Black midi. Goldberger and attached Epstein
agreement
13-72 8/5/2008
Email from Alex Acosta to Marie Villafatla, Bob Senior, Jeff Simian, Dexter Lee ,
and Karen Atkinson with attached suggestions to Superseding Non-Prosecution
Agreement
13-73 8/7/2008
Email from Roy Black to Marie Villafana responding to 8/7/08 email providing
notification of possible compelled disclosure of the Non-Prosecution Agreement
B-74 8/6/2008
Email response from Bob Senior to Marie Villafaila regarding Roy Black 's
response to email
B-75 8/12/2008
Email response from Bob Senior to Marie Villafana to request for conference call
prior to call with Roy Black
B-76 8/13/2008
Email from Bob Senior to Karen Atkinson, Alex Acosta , Jeff Montan, Dexter
Lee , and Marie Villalatla regarding Epstein and call with Jay' Lefkowitz
B-77 8/13/2008
Email response from Alex Acosta to Karen Atkinson, Bob Senior, Jeff Sloman,
Dexter Lee , and Marie \Walt regarding final version of agreement
B-78 8/13/2008 Letter front Marie Villafana to Lefkowitz regarding performance of the NPA
13-79
8/13/2008 -
8/15/2008
Email chain between Alex Acosta , Karen Atkinson, Bob Senior, Jeff Montan,
Dexter Lee , and Marie Villafana regarding scope of Epstein agreement and
correspomletwe and telephone conference with Jay Lefkowitz
B-80 8/14/2008
Email fromJay Lefkowitz to Marie Villafatia and Karen Atkinson re follow up
point regarding victims
15-81 8/15/2008
Etnail from Bob Senior to Alex Acosta , Marie Villalafia,Jeff Sloman, Dexter Lee ,
and Kamen Atkinson questioning whether offer shoukl be withdrawn as opposed
to considering it a nullity
B-82 8/15/2008
Email chain between Marie Villafana , Alex Acosta ,JeffSbman, Bob Senior,
Karen Atkinson, and Dexter Lee re drat response to 8/15/2008 email fromJay
Lefkowitz regarding implementation of the NPA
PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL Page 7 of 10 CONTAINS 6(c) MATERIAL
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MARIE VILLAFANA
Exhibit # Date Description
B-83 8/15/2008 Letter from Marie Villafaiia to Jay Lelkowitz and Roy Black re terms of NPA
8-84 8/18/2008 Letter fromJay tellowitz to Marie Villafana regarding restitution
B-85 8/21/2008
Letter from Marie Villafaila to Jay I elkowilz and Roy Black re Special Master and
draft Notification of Identified Victim
B-86 8/22/2008
Letter from lay Lelkowitz to Marie Villafana regarding misstatements in 8/21/08
VilliditIR letter
B-87 8/26/2008 Letter from Marie Villafaila to Jay Lelkowitz and Roy Black re victim's list
8-88 9/2/2008
Letter from Jay Lclkowitz to Marie Villafana agreeing that Goldberger should be
listed as the contact person for civil suits and re victim representativeJosefsberes
fees
B-89 9/2/2008
Mailed Amended Victim Notification letters to #1 )12, #3 (via Richard H. Willits),
#4, #13, #8 friaJeffrey Herman), #9, #10, #11, #14, #16, #I7 (via Theodore
Leopold), #20, #21, #23, #24, #25 (viaJelfrey Herman), #26 biaJellity Herman),
#30, #31, #32, #33, #37 (via Michael E. Dutko), #38, #44 biaJeffni Herman)
8-90 9/W2008
Victim notification letters to #36, #35 (via Brad Edwards ), #42, #43 (via Brad
Edwards )
B-9I 9/12/2008 Notification of Identified Victim letter #39
B-92 9/15/2008 Mailed victim notification letters for #I8 and #32
15-93
9/17/2008 -
11/4/2008 Entails and coorespondence with 'Ilie Florida Bar re victim notifications
B-94 11/14/2008 Notification of Identified Victim letters to #20, #40
13-95 12/4/2008
Email from Karen Atkinson to Marie Villafaila in response to draft letter notifying
victims of Epstein 's work release
B-96 12/5/2008
Email from Marie Villafaila to victim's attorneys with attached Work Release
Notice
15-97 12/8/2008
Notification of NVotk Release letters to Spencer Kuvin,Jack Scuola, Michael
Dutko, #11,1439 and #40
B-98 12/9/2008
Notification of Work Release letters to #4, #10, #16, #I8, #23, #24, #33, #38, #30
(personal note), #42
B-99
12/12/2008 -
12/29/2008 Entails with attorneys for victims regarding Epstein work release
11-100 12/12/2008 Notification of Work Release letter to #42
B-101 12/12/2007
Entails between Marie Villafana , Frederica Devlin, and Bob Senior regarding
planning indictment review
B-102 1/7/2008
Email From Marie Villafaaa to Alex Acosta ,Jeff Montan, Bob Senior, Karen
Atkinson, and Rolando Gant regarding proposed additional investigative steps in
Epstein case
13-103
1/9/2008 •
1/14/2008
Entails between Marie Villafaiia, Drew Oosterbaan, Myesha Braden, Nesbitt
Kuyrkendall, an dJason Richards regarding assigning a CEOS attorney to the
investigation, meeting with the CEOS attorney and victims in Florida , the results
of the meetings and planned additional meetings, and revisions to the indictment
in light of the meetings
II -104 1/10/2008
Email chain between Myesha Braden and Marie Villafaita regarding meeting on
1/11/2008
B-10.5 1/14/2008
Entail chain between Myesha Braden, Marie Villafafia, E. Nesbitt Kuyrkeimlall,
and Jason Richards regarding meeting and additional 302s
PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. Page 8 410 CONTAINS 6(e) MATERIAL
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MARIE VILLAFANA
Exhibit It Date Description
B-106 1/I7/2008 Agents compile evidence for Bob Senior indictment review
B-107 1/25/2008
Email chain between Myesha Braden and Marie Villafafia regarding victim's
names in indictment
B-108 1/31/2008 Additional grand jury subpoenas
B-109
1/28/2008 •
2/1/2008
Entails between Marie Villafana ,Jeff Sloman, Alex Acosta , Nesbit Kuyrkendall,
Jason Richards, and Alan Santiago regarding results of additional victim-witness
interviews and requesting intervention with CEOS to move review process along
B-I 10
2/12/2008 -
2/22/2008
Entails between Marie Villafana , E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, Jason Richards, and
Myesha Braden re information for indictment/ongoing investigation
B-111
2/20/2008 -
W21/2008
Entails between Drew Oosterbaan, Marie Villatana, Robert Senior,Jeff Montan,
Sigal Mandelker, Karen Atkinson, Alex Acosta , Rolando Garcia and Myesha
Braden regarding status of CEOS plans to meet with counsel for Epstein and
status of indictment review
B-112 245/2008
Email chain between Marie Villafana and Caroline regarding use of Grand
Jury
B-113 2/25/2008
Email from Marie Villafafia toJeffSlontan, Bob Senior, Rolando Garcia, Karen
Atkinson, and Myesha Braden re staying with same grand jury or present to a
different gnmd jury
13-114 2/26/2008
Email front Marie Villatana to Myesha Braden re CEOS independent review and
concern about victim's mulles being released
B-115 2/26/2008
Email response from Marie Villatalia to Jeff Sloman and Bob Senior with
concerns regarding allowing Epstein to keep the same deal as before
13-116 2/27/2008
Email chain between Marie Villatana, David Weinstein , and Bob Senior re email
to the Civil Rights Chief
B-117 2/2W2008
Email chain between Marie Villatanajason Richards, and E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall
regarding further investigation
B-118 2/29/2008
Entails betweenJeff Montan, Marie Villatafia, Robert Senior, and David
Weinstein regarding continuing investigation and status of CEOS review
B-119 3/12/2008
Email from E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall to Marie Villafafia re affidavit for memory
cards
B-I20 3/17/2008 Two search warrants for digital camera memory cards
13-121 3/5/2008
Entails between Marie Villafafia and E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall with attached email
to Alex Acosta , Jeff Montan, Drew Oosterbaan, Robert Senior, Myesha Braden,
Rolando Garcia, and Karen Atkinson regarding meeting in DC, additional
information to prepare for meeting, and new information from ongoing
investigation
B-122 3/14/2008
Entails between Marie Villafafia, Rolando Garcia, Karen Atkinson, Frederica
Devlin, and Shawn Ball regarding complete indictment package for Robert Senior
fatal review
B-123 6/3/2008 Letter from Jeff Sloman to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip with auachmems
B-124
4/21/2008 -
5/9/2008
Emits between Marie Villataila,Jeff Sloman, Karen Atkinson, Bob Senior, E.
Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, Jason Richards, and Drew Oosterbaan re status of grand jury
presentation. and ongoing investigation, and delay
PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. Page 9 of 10 CONTAINS 6(c) MATERIAL
EXHIBITS TO WRITTEN RESPONSE OF A. MARIE VILLAFASA
Exhibit N Date Description
5/15/2008 - Entails between Marie Villafana , Karen Atkinson. Bob Sentor,JeliSloman. am I
13-125 5/27/2008 agents regarding indictment review and status of investigation
13-126 5/30/2008 FBI -302 of 5/28/08 Interview of Individual #35
6/2/2008 4:25 pm Draft letter from Jeff Sloman to Deputy Attorney General
13-127 6/2/2008 Mark Hip
6/3/2008 10:40 am Draft letter fromJcff Sloman to Deputy Attorney General
B-128 6/3/2008 Mark Hip
Entails between Villafana and Kuyrkendall re subpoena issued to victimfwitness
13-129 6/6/2008 and need for additional subpoenas
13-130 6/17/2008 Application for 6001 immunity for grand jury witness
Letter from Matthew W. Friedrich, Acting Assistant Attorney General .
B-131 6/24/2008 authorizing application for a court order granting 6001 int:marl
B-B2 6/20/2008 Request to travel to York for witness interviews in June 2008 and subpoena
Entails between A. Marie Villafaria , E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, J. Richards, K.
Atkinson, and R. Senior regarding grand jury time, witness subpoena, and
B-133 6/23/2008 indictment
6/23/2008 - Entails between Marie Villalirna and attorney for grand jury witness regarding
1 t-I34 6/26/2008 immunity and travel for grand jury appearance
Entails between Marie Villafana and attorney for grand jury witness withdrawing
13-135 6/30/2008 subpoena
c'- i 1/31/2008 Email from Marie Villafana to Jeff Mon tan and Alex Acosta regarding victims
Email chain between Marie Villafana , David Weinstein ,Jeff Montan, Bob Senior,
Karen Atkinson, and Rolando Garcia with Epstein update from grand jury
presentation and grant front theJustice Department to provide legal
C-2 3/19/2008 representation to victims
3/19/2008 -
C-3 3/22/2008 rattails regarding victims being harassed by Epstein 's investigators
Draft of entail to be sent to Jeff and Matt stating that Villalana disagrees with
promising to have a meeting with Lel-court or any of Epstein 's other attorneys.
5/22/2007 -
Believes the prior meeting disclosed prosecution strafe*. and holding another
meeting will disclose even more. If meeting is held, Villafalia will ask to have the
case reassigned. Attached email correspondence between Andrew Lourie and G.
O4 5/23/2007 Lefcourt
Email from Matt Menchal to Marie Villatana and Andrew Louric regarding not
C-5 .5/14/2007 having approval to proceed with an indictment or complaint
10/3/2007 - Entail chain between Marie Villafana , Jeff Montan, and Jay Lefkonitz regarding
C-6 10/5/2007 appointing special master
10/16/2007 - Entails between Marie Villafana ,Jeff Montan, Alex Acosta , and* Lelkowitz
C-7 10/28/2007 regarding Special Master
PRIVILMED and CONFIDENTIAL. Page 10 of 10 CONTAINS 6(e) MATERIAL
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
5/1/2006
State Attorney • ga y E B
' Krischer
Michael S.
Reiter , Chief of
Police for Town
of Palm Beach
Letter urging State Attorney to proceed with probable cause affidavits and cast
filing packages or to recuse himself
i
5/23/2006 File Opening Documents for Operation Leap Year 2
7/24/2006
Michael S.
Reiter , Chief of
Police for Town
of Palm Beach
Letter noting that Palm Beach Police Chief was unhappy with State Attorney 's
handling of case and was referring matter to the FBI for investigation
7/26/2006 South Florida Sun-Sentinel Article Regarding Chief Reiter 's referral of case to
FBI
_
8/2/2006 Subpoena to Colonial Bank (return date 8/18/06 )
8/2/2006 Subpoena to Washington Mutual (return date 8/18/06 )
8/2/2006 Subpoena to Capital One (return date 8/18/06 )
8/2/2006 Subpoena to Chase (return date 8/18/06 )
8/2/2006 Subpoena to Hyperion Air , Inc. (return date 8/18/06 )
8/2/2006 Subpoena to JEGE, Inc . (return date 8/18/06 )
8/2/2006 Subpoena to David Neville Rodgers (return date 8/18/06 )
8/2/2006 Subpoena to DTG Operations d/b/a Dollar Rent-a-car (return date 8/18/06 )
8/2/2006 Subpoena to Royal Palm Beach Community High School (return date
8/18/06 )
8/2/2006 Subpoena to Custodian of Records 15th Judicial District (return date 8/18/06 )
8/4/2006
Victim Notification letters to Individuals #6, #9, #10, #11, #13, #15, #17,
#18, #20, #23, #24, #25, #26, #27, #28, #29, #30, #31, #32, #38, #39,
#41, #42, and #44
1:!
8/11/2006 Victim Notification letters to Individuals #4, #5, #6, #9, #12, #13, #15, #19.
#26, #28, #29, #31, #32, #34, #38, #39, #43, and #44
8/15/2006 Subpoena to (withdrawn) (return date 8/25/06 )
Privileged Confidential Page 1 of SI Contains 6(e) Material
CVUIDIT A 1
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
8/15/2006 Subpoena to Individual #4 (return date 8/25/06 )
8/15/2006 Subpoena to Individual #28 (return date 8/25/06 )
8/15/2006 Subpoena to Individual #44 (withdrawn) (return date 8/25/06 )
8/23/2006 Subpoena to Individual #4 (return date 9/1/06 )
8/23/2006 Subpoena to Individual #28 (return date 9/1/06 )
8/23/2006 Subpoena to Reimer Employment Agency (return date 9/1/06 )
8/23/2006 Subpoena to Evidence Custodian Palm Beach Police Department (return date
9/1/06 )
8/24/2006 Villafalia Jim Eisenberg Email re Individual #28 9
8/28/2006 Subpoena to Custodian of Records State Attorney 's Office (return date
9/15/06 )
8/28/2006 Subpoena to Custodian of Records 15th Judicial District (return date 9/15/06 )
9/13/2006 Subpoena to Good Samaritan Hospital (return date 9/ 22/06)
9/21/2006 Subpoena to The Dalton School (return date 9/29/09 )
9/26/2006
Acosta ,
Mulvihill,
Sloman, Noto,
Waters, L°urie' Stefin, Atkinson,
Garcia, Brown,
Boscovich,
Martinez
Villafaila Memo regarding changes to Child Explotation Statutes in Tide 18 16
10/19/2006 Subpoena to Individual #28 (return date 10/27/06 )
10/24/2006 Email chain between Villafaiia and Jim Eisenberg discussing Individual #28 9
10/30/2006 Villafatia Guy Lewis Email re representation of Jeffrey Epstein 10
10/31/2006 Villafatia Guy Lewis Email chain to set up call 10
11/8/2006 Lourie, Villafana ' cc: Menchel Sloman Email re Lilly Ann Sanchez /representation of Jeffrey Epstein
Privileged Confidential Page 2 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
11/13/2006 Subpoena to Bill Hammond (pilot) (return date 12/1/06 )
11/13/2006 Subpoena to Larry Visoski (pilot)(return date 12/1/06 )
11/13/2006 Subpoena to Janusz Banasiak (property manager)(retum date 12/1/06 )
11/13/2006 Subpoena to Adriana Mucinska (former assistant) (return date 12/1/06 ) 15
I 1/15/2006 A. Marie
Villafalia
Lilly Ann
Sanchez
Gerald Lefcourt from New York and Lilly Ann Sanchez will be dealing with
the U.S. Attorney 's Office in the Jeffrey Epstein matter 11
11/16/2006 Lilly Ann
Sanchez
A. Marie
Viilafan_a Request for documents and information necessary to the investigation
11/17/2006 Subpoena to Extra Touch Flowers (return date 2/6/07 )
11/21/2006 Lilly Ann
Sanchez
A. Marie
Villafaria Requesting a meeting to discuss 11/16/06 letter 11
11/29/2006 Lilly Ann
Sanchez
A. Marie
Villafafia
AUSA Villafatia will be out of district and will not be available for meeting
during the proposed dates, but will schedule the meeting when she returns. 11
I 2/1/2006 A. Marie
Villafalia
Lilly Ann
Sanchez
Will check on the document requests and will schedule the meeting in the new
year. 11
12/18/2006 Subpoena to Janusz Banasiak (property manager) (return date 1/12/07 )
12/18/2006 Subpoena to (former assistant) (return date 1/12/07 ) 15
12/18/2006 Subpoena to Anthony Figueroa (return date 1/12/07 )
1/5/2007 A. Marie
Villafatia
Lilly Ann
cl. inchez Request for dates and times to schedule meeting 11
1/8/2007 Lilly Ann
Sanchez
A. Marie
Vaifan_a Request for documents prior to setting meeting 1
1/17/200 - Lilly Ann
Sanchez
Andrew Lourie
Client wants to cooperate with the investigation, but requests for documents
were overly broad. Provided shortened and narrowed list and request for
documents to be provided by 1/25/07 , so they could be reviewed prior to
2/1/07 meeting.
Privileged Confidential Page 3 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
1/18/2007 A. Marie
Villafaiia
Lilly Ann
Sanchez
Because of the Palm Beach Police Department and the State Attorney 's . investigation for almost two years, Epstein hired counsel for all employees so
contact Ms. Sanchez for contact information for the attorneys.
I /22/2007 Andrew Lourie Sanchez
Looking forward to the 2/1/07 meeting and expect to send documents
previously provided to the Palm Beach County State Attorney 's Office by
1/25/07 .
I I
1/22/2007 Research re NPAs and 6001 immunity I c
1/23/2007 Lilly Ann
Sanchez
A. Marie
Nrillafafia
Request for a list of the individuals who have accepted Epstein 's offer of
payment for representation and the names of their attorneys.
2/1/2007 A. Marie
Villafafia
Gerald B.
Lefcourt Talking points and documents for 2/1/07 meeting 4
2/5/2007 A. Marie
Villafatia
Gerald B.
Lefcourt
Production of debit/credit card statement regarding Epstein 's birthday and a
purchase at Guys and Dolls made by Individual #18.
2/6/2007 Grand Jury Testimony of E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall I -
2/12/2007 A. Marie
Villafana
Lilly Ann
Sanchez
Emails between Villafana and Lilly Ann Sanchez regarding employee
representation with Laurie and Villafana handwritten notes 58
2/14/2007 Subpoena to Colonial Bank (return date 3/6/07 )
2/14/2007 Subpoena to Palm Beach National Bank (return date 3/6/07 )
2/14/2007 Subpoena to Western Union (return date 3/6/07 )
2/14/2007 Subpoena to Western Union (return date 3/6/07 )
2/14/2007 Subpoena to JP Morgan Chase (return date 3/6/07 )
2/20/2007 Meeting (US: Andy Laurie, Marie Villafana , and Junior Ortiz, DEF: Lilly
Sanchez and Gerald Lefcourt )
2/23/2007 A. Marie
Villafaiia
Gerald B.
Lefcourt
Excerpts of drafts of transcripts from recorded interviews of various witnesses
taken during state's investigation.
2/27/2007 Grand Jury Testimony of E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall 18
3/2/2007 Subpoena to Thomas Rofrano (return date 3/13/07 )
3/2/2007 Subpoena to Johanna Sjoberg (return date 3/13/07 )
3/2/2007 Subpoena to Christina (return date 3/13/07 )
3/2/2007 Subpoena to Palm Beach County Health Dept (return date 3/13/07 )
3/2/2007 Subpoena to Perry Bard , DC (return date 3/13/07 )
Privileged Confidential Page 4 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit # 3/15/2007 Victim Notification letter to Individual #4 19 3/16/2007 Subpoena to Individual #29 (return date 3/27/07 )
3/20/2007 Grand Jury Testimony of E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall 20 3/20/2007 Subpoena to Individual #32 (return date 4/3/07 )
3/22/2007 Villafatia Stefan Cassella Email re money laundering question 56
4/4/2007 Subpoena to Individual #37 (return date 4/17/07 )
4/16/2007 Subpoena to Chase Bank USA, NA Atm: Jeff Sehr (return date 4/24/07 )
4/16/2007 Subpoena to Adult Video Warehouse (return date 5/1/07 )
4/16/2007 Subpoena to Eve's Garden (return date 5/1/07 )
4/17/2007 Subpoena to Individual #28 (return date 5/1/07 )
4/20/2007 Subpoena to Adult Video Warehouse (return date 5/1/07 )
4/24/2007 Grand Jury Testimony of Special Agent E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall 21 4/24/2007 Grand Jury Testimony of Individual #37 22
4/24/2007 Subpoena to New York Strategy Group , LLC Custodian of Records (return
date 5/8/07 )
4/24/2007 Subpoena to Hyperion Air , Inc. Custodian of Records (return date 5/8/07 )
4/24/2007 Subpoena to JEGE, Inc . (return date 5/8/07 )
5/8/2007 Grand Jury presentation materials 23 5/8/2007 Grand Jury Testimony of E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall 24 5/8/2007 Grand Jury Testimony of Jason
Richards 25
5/10/2007 A. Marie
Villafatia
Jack A.
Goldberger Response to subpoenas JEGE, Inc . and Hyperion Air , Inc..
5/14/2007
Marie Villafatia
and Andrew
Lourie
Matthew
Menchel
Email re Operation Leap Year with email from Villafatia to Lourie and
Menchel (5/14/07 ) attached 26/C-5
5/15/2007 Grand Jury Testimony of Special Agent E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall 27 5/16/2007 Subpoena to American Express TRS Co., Inc. (return date 5/29/07 )
5/17/2007 A. Marie
Villafafia
Jack A.
Goldberger
Extension of compliance deadlines until 5/29/07 for subpoena responses for
JEGE, Inc . and Hyperion Air , Inc.
Privileged Confidential Page 5 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
5/18/2007 Matthew
Menchel
A. Marie
Villafatia
Email informing Menchel of intent to subpoena Roy Black 's private
investigator and steps taken to obtain DOJ authorization 26
5/21/2007
Matthew
Menchel and Jeff
Sloman
A. Marie
Villafatia Email seeking guidance on grand jury presentation 26/54
5/21/2007 Subpoena to Paul A. Lavery (return date 5/29/07 ) 59
5/22/2007 Andrew Cootie Gerald B.
Lefcourt
Letter requesting to meet with Matthew Menchel and Jeffrey Sloman and \ lc\
Acosta prior to an indictment being filed
5/22/2007
Matthew
Menchel and Jeff
Sloman; cc: A.
Marie Villafalia
Andrew Laurie Email re letter received from Gerald Lefcourt discussing a meeting to discuss
Epstein investigation
5/22/2007 Grand Jury Testimony of Special Agent E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall '()
5/23/2007 Karen Atkinson A. Marie
Villafaila
Draft of email to be sent to Sloman and Menchel stating that Villafatia
disagrees with promising to have a meeting with Lefcourt or any of Epstein 's
other attorneys. Believes the prior meeting disclosed prosecution strategy and
holding another meeting will disclose even more. If meeting is held, Villafaiii
will ask to have the case reassigned. Attached email correspondence between
Andrew Laurie and G. Lefcourt
28/C-4
5/31/2007 Subpoena to J. Epstein Virgin Islands Foundation, Inc. (return date 6/21/07 )
5/31/2007 Subpoena to J. Epstein & Company, Inc . (return date 6/21/07 )
5/31/2007 Subpoena to Epstein Interests (return date 6/21/07 )
5/31/2007 Sub_poena to Financial Trust Company , Inc. (return date 6/12/07 )
5/31/2007
Subpoena to Royal Palm Beach Community High School (return date
6/12/07 )
6/1/2007 Gerald B.
Lefcourt
A. Marie
Villafaiia
Subpoenas for J. Epstein Virgin Islands Foundation, Inc., J. Epstein & Co.,
Inc., Epstein Interests, and Financial Trust Company , Inc.
6/1/2007
Folder entitled "(Victims) Additional 302's" containing reports of interviews
conducted in June 2007, October 2007, and March 2008
Privileged Confidential Page 6 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
6/7/2007 Victim Notification letters to Individuals #3, #9, #31, #38, #40, and #43 30
6/7/2007 Subpoena to Park A. Cadillac Limo Service (return date 6/26/07 )
6/11/2007 Subpoena to Individual #40 (return date 6/26/07 )
6/11/2007 Subpoena to All Star Taxi and Limo Service (return date 6/26/07 )
6/11/2007 Subpoena to Airport Executive Towncar Service Dan Tischler (return date
6/26/07 )
6/12/2007 A. Marie
Villafafia Gerald Lefcourt
Production response to 5/31/07 subpoenas to J. Epstein Virgin Islands
Foundation, Inc., J. Epstein & Co., Inc., Epstein Interests, and Financial Trust
Company , Inc.
6/13/2007 Subpoena to Majestic Theatre (return date 6/06/07 )
6/13/2007 Subpoena to Broward Center for the Performing Arts (return date 6/26/07 )
6/13/2007 Subpoena to Kravis Center for the Performing Arts (return date 6/26/07 )
6/14/2007 31
6/14/2007 -6/21/2007 Emails between Marie Villafaiia, Karen Atkinson,
Andrew Lourie, Matt Menchel , and Jeff Sloman regarding addendum to Pros
Memo, grand jury presentation and changes to indictment, and meeting with
counsel for Epstein
6/18/2007 Gerald B.
Lefcourt
A. Marie
Villafaiia
tt. Leer thanking Lefcourt for accepting service of subpoena addressed to the
Custodian of Records of NES, LLC and requesting acceptance of subpoena
issued to New York Strategy Group , Inc.
6/18/2007 Subpoena to William Riley (return date 7/10/07 ) 60
6/18/2007 Subpoena to Riley Kiraly (return date 7/10/07 ) 6I
6/18/2007 Subpoena to NES, LLC (return date 7/10/07 )
6/21/2007 Matthew
Menchel
A. Marie
Villafafia
Email re Meeting next week with emails from Menchel to Villafaiia (6/21/07 )
and Viliafaiia to Menchel (6/21/07 ) attached
,
6/22/2007 Subpoena to Guys and Dolls (return date 7/10/07 )
6/25/2007
Jeffrey Sloman
and Andrew
_ Lourie
Gerald B.
12fcourt
Letter containing overview of position of Epstein 's counsel and the materials
planned to present at 6/26/07 meeting with handwritten attorney (Villafatia)
notes
Privileged Confidential Page 7 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
6/25/2007
Man Mcnchel
and Marie
Villafatia
Andrew Lourie Email entitled "Thoughts on Lefcourt 's letter" 32
6 /26/2007
Meeting (US: Jeff Slotnan, Matt Manche', Marie Villafaila, Junior Ortiz,
Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, DEF: Alan Dershowitz , Roy Black , Gerald Lefcourt and
Lilly Sanchez )
6 2- 2007
Subpoena to Live Nation Theatrical/Broadway Across America (return date
7/10/07 )
7/1/2007 Sanchez,
Lefcourt Villafana Email re oustanding subpoenas and planned meeting for 7/11/07
7/3/2007
7/3/2007 -7/13/2007 Email chain between Matt Menchel and Marie Villafalia
regarding disagreement on Menchel 's plea negotiations and written request for
meeting between USAO management and victims
7/3/2007
7/3/2007 -7/4/2007 Emails between Marie Villafaiia and Andrew Lourie
regarding extension of time to respond to subpoenas requested by Lilly Ann
Sanchez and possible resolution of case
7/6/2007
Jeffrey Sloman
and Andrew
Lourie
Gerald B.
Lefcourt and
Alan
Dershowitz
Follow-up letter to 6/26/07 meeting including facts, law, and policy that
should inform any decision made on how and whether to proceed 33
7/13/2007 Villafaila Roy Black Letter with handwritten attorney (Lourie) notes 34
7/13/2007 Matthew
Menchel
A. Marie
Villafana
Email re Epstein with email from Menchel (7/5/07 ), Villafana to Marche'
(7/4/07 ) and Sloman to Villafana (7/3/07 ) attached 3
7/16/ 2007 Black Villafatia Response to letter regarding subpoena to Paul Lavery for computer equipment
removed from Epstein 's residence
7/16/2007
Matt Menchel
and Andrew
Lourie
A. Marie
Villafatia
Email regarding correspondence from Roy Black and Motion to Quash Lavery
subpoena
7/17/2007
Motion of Jeffrey Epstein to Intervene and Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas and
Incorporated Memorandum of Law
Privileged Confidential Page 8 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
7/17/2007
Affidavit of Roy Black , Esq., in Support of Motion of Jeffrey Epstein to
Intervene and to Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas and Incorporated
Memorandum of Law
7/18/2007
Andrew Laurie
and Matt
Menchel
Marie Villafana Email from Villafafia to Matt Menchel regarding Roy Black objection to
subpoenas subpoenas addressed to William Riley and Riley Kiraly
7/19/2007 Villafana Mille Levy
(USAPAE)
Email regarding comments to Rule 16 about disclosing identifying information
about victims
7/19/2007
Email chain between Marie Villafaiia, Andrew Lourie, Matt Menchel , S/A
Jason Richards and S/A Eliasib Ortiz regarding potential service of target
letters
7/1 9/ 2007 Preparing Motion for Post-indictment protective order
7/24/2007 Subpoena to Rachel Eve Lockwood (return date 8/14/07 )
7/25/2007 Matthew
Menchel
Gerald B.
Lefcourt and
Alan
Dershowitz
Document entitled: "Data that strongly supports the arguments made that no
charge can or should be made under 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b)" 35
7/26/2007
Matt Menchel
and Andrew
Laurie
Marie Villafatia Email regarding proposed changes to indictment 3e 6 I
7/26/2007
Meeting where Criminal Chief Menchel announces that USA Acosta will offer
a two-year state plea. Present: Matt Menchel , Marie Villafafia, Andy Lowrie
(phone), Valerie Parlave, Junior Ortiz, Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, and Jason
Richards
7/27/2007 Research re 18 U.S.C. § 2255 37
7/31/2007
Jeff Sloman,
Matt Menchel ,
and Andrew
Laurie
Marie Villafafia Email summarizing proposed plea terms as per Menchel recommendation 4 and 38
7/31/2007
Meeting (US: Jeff Sloman, Matt Menchel , Marie Villafatia, Andy Laurie,
Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and Jason Richards, DEF: Roy Black , Gerald Lefcourt
and Lilly Sanchez )
Privileged Confidential Page 9 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
7/31/2007
U.S. Response to Motion of Jeffrey Epstein to Intervene and to Quash Grand
Jury Subpoenas and Cross-Motion to Compel and Sealed Document Tracking
Form with Sealed, Ex Parte Declarations
7/31/2007
7/31/2007 -8/3/2007 Email chain between Jeff Sloman, Matt Menchel ,
Andrew Lourie, and Marie Villafaiia regarding plea negotiations 39
8/1/2007
8/1/2007 -8/2/2007 Emails between Menchel and Villafaiia regarding plea
negotiations
8/2/2007 Matthew
Menchel
Lilly Ann
Sanchez
As discussed at meeting, Epstein is prepared to resolve the matter via state
forum. Proposal of 2 years supervised custody with two additional years of
reporting to probation
8 and 40
8/2/2007
Emails between Matt Menthe', Jeff Sloman, Andy Louric, and Marie Villafana
regarding letter received from Lilly Ann Sanchez
8/3/2007 Lilly Ann
Sanchez
Matthew
Menchel
2 year term of incarceration is a non-negotiable minimum and U.S.Attomey
Acosta is not inclined to meet with counsel for Epstein . Epstein must advise
of his decision by 8/17/07 .
8/3/2007
Matt Menchel ,
Andrew Louie,
Jeff Sloman,
Karen Atkinson
Marie Villafaria Email regarding draft response to correspondence from Epstein counsel and
planned investigative steps if agreement cannot be reached i I
8/6/2007
Cyndee Campos,
Frederica Devlin
and Jeff Sloman
Marie Villa feta Emails regarding Matt Menchel 's correspondence prior to his departure ; ,
8/6/2007 Subpoena to Individual #3 (return date 8/21/07 )
8/6/2007 Subpoena to Individual #43 (return date 8/12/07 )
8/7/2007 Andy Lourie Marie Villafana Email regarding deadline set for Epstein plea and Epstein 's plan to demand a
meeting with CEOS I 1
8/7/2007
Email chain between Marie Villafalia, Cyndee Campos, and Alex Acosta
regarding meeting to discuss Epstein matter
41,
Privileged Confidential Page 10 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
8/7/2007 Email chain from Jeff Sloman to Andrew Oosterbaan, Marie Villafaiia, and
Alex Acosta regarding Epstein meeting 43
8/7/2007
Reply of Jeffrey Epstein to United States' Response to His Motion to
Intervene and to Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas and Cross-Motion to Compel
and Sealed Document Tracking Form
8/8/2007 Andrew
Oosterbaan Marie Villafaiia Email regarding plea negotiations, guideline calculations, and assistance in
preparing case for trial 43
8/8/2007 Research re 18 U.S.C. § 2255 37 8/15/2007 Subpoena to Bear Stearns (return date 9/4/07 )
8/16/2007 Subpoena to Adam Perrylang (return date 9/4/07 )
8/16/2007 Subpoena to Lesley Groff (return date 9/4/07 )
8/16/2007 Subpoena to Jean -Luc Brunel (return date 9/4/07 )
8/16/2007 Subpoena to Harry Beller (return date 9/11/07 )
8/16/2007 Subpoena to Eric Gany (return date 9/11/07 )
8/17/2007 Motion of William Riley and Riley Kiraly for an Extension of Time Nunc Pro
Tunc to File Their Reply and Proposed Order
8/17/2007
Reply of William Riley and Riley Kiraly to the Government's Response to the
Motion to Intervene and to Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas and Cross Motion
to Compel
8/23/2007 A. Made
Villafaiia Gerald Lefcourt Letter that he cannot accept service for Eric Gany
8/28/2007 A. Marie
Villafaiia
Nathan Z.
Dershowitz
Left messages with Sarah Kellen and to request if he can
accept service on their behalf
8/30/2007
Jeff Sloman,
Andrew Laurie,
Drew
Oosterbaan,
John McMillan,
Karen Atkinson
Marie Villa fana I imail regarding press coverage of meeting with Ken Starr
Privileged Confidential Page I I of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
8/30/2007
United States Surreply to Replies filed by Witness William Riley and
Intervenor Jeffrey Epstein re Motion to Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas and
Scaled Document Tracking Form and Supplemental Ex Parte Declaration
8/31/2007
Meeting (US: Drew Oosterbaan, Marie Villafalia, Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and
Jason Richards)
9/4/2007 Jeff Sloman Marie Villafaiia
9/4/2007 -9/6/2007 Emails between Jeff Sloman and Marie Villafalia
regarding planned participation of FBI ASAIC at 9/7/07 meeting with
Epstein defense team
9/6/2007 A. Marie
Villafaiia Gerald 121Court Beller and Gany are represented by Nat Dershowitz . NES is working on
getting the extra documents requested and the certification.
9/6/2007 Nathan Z.
Dershowitz
A. Marie
Villafana Questioning representation of Sarah Kellen and
9/6/2007 Nathan Z.
Dershowitz
A. Marie
Villafaiia
Subpoena for Leslie Groff to appear for Grand Jury on 9/ 18/07 and
anticipated topics
9/6/2007 Nathan Z.
Dershowitz
A. Marie
vigafana Subpoenas for Harry Beller and Eric Gany to appear before GJ on 9/11/07 .
9/7/2007 9:31 am draft Plea Agreement
9/7/2007 9:43 am draft Non-Prosecution Agreement
9/7/2007 1:15 pm draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
9/ 7/2007 1:17 pm draft Plea Agreement
9/7/2007
Meeting (US: Alexander Acosta , Drew Oosterbaan, Jeff Sloman, Marie
Villafalia, and John McMillan, DFF: Kenneth Starr , Jay Lefkowitz , and Lilly
Sanchez)
9/10/2007 5:17 pm draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
9/10/2007 J. Sloman A. Marie
Villafaila Email re negotiations 46
9/10/2007 J. Sloman, J.
McMillan
A. Marie
Villafaiia Email re state grand jury proceedings 45
9/10/2007 Jeff Sloman,
Andrew Laurie
A. Marie
Villafatia Email re FBI 45
9/10/2007 Lefcourt Villafafia Email with 4 page NPA attached (RFP3) 47
Privileged Confidential Page 12 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
9/10/2007 Proposed Non -Prosecution Agreement provided to Gerald Lefcourt on
9/10/2007 66
9/10/2007 9/10/2007 -9/11/2007 Emails between Marie Villafidia, Alex Acosta , and Jeff
Sloman regarding modifications to the proposed Non -Prosecution Agreement 46
9/10/2007
9/10/2007 - 9/ 14/2007 Emails between Marie Villafatia, Andrew Lourie, Jeff
Sloman, Karen Atkinson, Rolando Garcia, Shawn Ball, and Alex Acosta
regarding final plea negotiations, finalizing details with State Attorney 's Office
and final revisions to indictment package
9/11/2007 A. Lourie A. Marie
Villafatia Email re meeting with G. Lefcourt with attached correspondence 46
9/11/2007 A. Lourie A. Marie
Villafaiia Email re revised Agreement with attached correspondence 46
9/11/2007 A. Marie
Villafalia . A Lourie Email re scheduling a meeting regarding finalizing the agreement with attached
corresondcnce 46
9/11/2007 A. Marie
Villafatla A. Oosterbaan Email re negotiations with attached correspondence 48
9/11/2007 A. Marie
Villafatia Andrew Lourie
Email regarding revised agreement - Plea to the 3 specified charges, a 30
month sentence, split 20 in jail and 10 in "community control," and agree that
the girls are victims for purposes of damages. Also includes deadlines for a
plea and sentencing date
9/ 11/2007 A. Oosterbaan A. Marie
Villafaiia Email re status of negotiations with attached correspondence 48
9/11/2007 Lefcourt Villafatia Email with 4 page NPA attached .1-
9/11/2007 Proposed Non -Prosecution Agreement incorporating Acosta edits provided to
Gerald Lefcourt on 9/11/2007 67
9/11/2007
Emails between Marie Villafatia, John McMillan, Drew Oosterbaan, Nesbitt
Kuyrkendall, and Jason Richards regarding changes to the draft indictment and
status of plea negotiations
9/11/2007 2:13 pm draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
Privileged Confidential Page 13 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
9/12/2007 A. Marie
Villafatia
Nathan Z.
Dershowitz Ms. Groff will proceed by interview.
9/12/2007
Meeting (US: Andy Lourie, Rolando Garcia and Marie Villafafia, DEF: Jay
Lefkowitz , Gerald Lefcourt and Jack Goldberger , STATE OF FLORIDA :
Barry !Casket and Latina Belohlavek )
9/12/2007
A. Marie
Villafalia; cc:
Andrew Lowrie
Jay Lefkowitz
Email in response to A. Marie Villafafia's email stating that the Office is
satisfied in principle with the agreement, but uncomfortable with the
recommended federal charge due to jurisdiction. Response states that defense
understands the concerns and will work to come up with a mutually acceptable
solution.
9/13/2007
A. Acosta , J.
Sloman, R.
Garcia, K.
Atkinson, A.
Lourie
A. Marie
Villafafia Email re plea negotiations 46
9/13/2007 A. Lourie A. Marie
Villafatia Email re plea negotiations with attached correspondence i6
9/13/2007 A. Lourie A. Marie
Villafafia Email re charging strategy with attached correspondence 46
9/13/2007 A. Marie
Villafatia A. Lourie Email re final negotiations with attached correspondence 46
9/13/2007 A. Marie
Villafafia A. Oosterbaan Email re setting up trust fund k.<
9/13/2007 A. Marie
Villafaila Jay Lefkowitz Misdemeanors 403, 1512(d) and 47 U S.0 223(a)(1)(B) 4')
9/13/2007 A. Marie
Villafaiia Lourie Assault on the plane or conspiracy 46
9/13/2007 A. Oosterbaan A. Marie
Villafaiia Email re trust agreement with attached correspondence 4S
Privileged Confidential Page 14 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
9/13/2007
Andrew Lourie,
Alex Acosta , Jeff
Sloman, Rolando
Garcia, Karen
Atkinson
Manic vfflafitha
in1. ails regarding plea to federal charges recommending 18 U.S.C. 403 or
1512g, or 47 U.S.C. 223(a)(1)(B); response that Epstein was only willing to
plead to assault on the plane; and rejection of facts supporting assault on the
plane charge
9/13/2007 K. Atkinson, S.
Bak). McMillan
A. Marie
Villafatia Email re indictment package In
9/13/2007 R. Garcia, J.
slornan
A. Marie
Villafaria Email re conference call with J. Lefkowitz 46
9/13/2007 Subpoena to Wolf Camera (return date 9/25/07 )
9/13/2007 6:36pm draft Plea Agreement
9/13/2007 6:55pm draft Information
9/13/2007 9/13/2007 -9/14/2007 Entails regarding Marie Villafaria research regarding
victim trust fund set up in Alaska child exploitation case t•-•
9/13/2007 Additions to pros memo/indictment - Individuals #3, #43, #38, #26, and
#39
9/14/2007 A. Marie
Villafaiia A. Loupe Email re charging strategy with attached correspondence ;6
9/14/2007 A. Marieviihfaria Jay Lefkowitz requesting draft to include 403 in lieu of 1512 .1()
9/14/2007
A. Marie
Villafatia, A.
Acosta , R.
Garcia, A.
Lowrie, K.
Atkinson, S. Ball
J. Sloman Email re finalizing documents 46
Privileged Confidential Page 15 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
9/14/2007
J. Sloman, A.
Acosta , A.
Lourie, It.
Garcia, K.
Atkinson, J.
McMillan, S. Ball
A. Marie
Villafafia Email re plea negotiations In
9/14/2007 Lefkowitz Villafatia Email - 1 page with two plea agreements attached, nine pages total ;9
9/14/2007
Villafafia,
Acosta , Garcia,
Laurie
Sloman Proposed plea agreement and information - Lourie will help finalize .16
9/14/2007 8:47 am draft Information
9/14/2007 8:53 am draft Plea Agreement
9/14/2007 9:38 am draft Information
9/14/2007 9:48 am draft Plea Agreement
9/15/2007 2:29 pm draft Information
9/15/2007 2:46 pm draft Plea Agreement
9/15/2007 Lefkowitz Villafafia Email with attached Information and Plea Agreement 49
9/ 16/2007 Lefkowitz Villafaila Email re 11th Circuit cases on simple assault and found language with attached
Epstein Plea Offer
9/16/2007 Villafafia Lefkowitz Email with attached 5 page Agreement 49
9/ 16/2007
Email chain between Lefkowitz and Villabfia regarding changing the
documents to 1512 and language in the plea agreement 46
9/16/2007 12:00 pm draft Information
9/16/2007 12:09 pm draft Plea Agreement
9/16/2007 12:21_pm Lefkowitz proposed Agreement
9/16/2007 4:42 pm draft Plea Agreement
9/17/2007 A. Acosta A. Marie
Villafafia Email re negotiation 46
9/17/2007 A. Marie
Vi &fails
Al Acosta Please make sure Lefkowitz understands that the Non -Prosecution agreement
ex provided is only a draft and will still need final approval. 46
Privileged Confidential Page 16 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
9/17/2007 A. Marie
Villafana
. Jay Lefkowttz Email requesting obstruction proffer that is already drafted and inquiring
whether deferred prosecution agreement would be made public 49
9/17/2007
A. Marie
Villafalia and
Roy Black ; cc:
Gerald Lefcourt ,
John McMillan,
Karen Atkinson,
and Andrew
Lourie
. Jay Lefkowitz
Response to email that Jenny from Judge Marra 's office spoke with the Judge
and he agreed to take the matter off the calendar. If a plea agreement is
reached, USAO will withdraw the subpoena and Mr. Black will withdraw his
Motion to Quash.
9/17/2007
A. Marie
Villafaiist, R.
Garcia, A.
Lourie, K.
Atkinson, J.
McMillan
A. Acosta Email re draft Agreement with attached correspondence 46
9/17/2007 Jay Lefkowitz A. Marie
Villafaiia
Options for plea: 1. Original agremeent where Epstein pleads only to state
charges and serves his time in state, except that we can agree to only 18
months imprisonment. 2. Epstein pleads guilty to the state charges and also
pleads to either two obstruction counts or to one count of violating 47 U.S.C.
223(a)(1)(B), with a joint non -binding recommendation of 18 months, so that
he can serve his time federally. 3. I go back to the U.S. Attorney and ask him
to agree to an ABA-plea to a 371 count (conspiracy to violate 2422(b)) with a
binding 20-month recommendation so that he can serve all of his time in a
federal facility. 4. Epstein pleads guilty to one obstruction count and serves
part of his time federally and part state.
9/17/2007 Leflcowitz Villafaha- Email informing of removal of hearing on Motion to Quash from Judge
Marra 's calendar 49
Privileged Confidential Page 17 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
9/17/2007 R. Garcia, A.
Lourie
A. Marie
Villafaiia Email re negotiation strategy 46
9/ 17/2007 11:39 am draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
9/17/2007 11:42 am draft Non-Prosecution Agreement
9/17/2007
Rolando Garcia
and Andrew
Louric
A. Marie
Villafana - Emailre Epstein providing update re plea negotiations 46
9/17/2007
9/17/2007 -9/19/2007 Entails between Marie Villafaiia, Rolando Garcia,
Andrew Lowrie, Alex Acosta , Karen Atkinson, and John McMillan regarding
negotiations of a federal plea and a non-prosecution agreement
9/18/2007
A. Acosta , A.
Louric, R.
Garcia, K.
Atkinson, J.
McMillan
A. Marie
Villafafia Email re negotiating strategy 16
9/18/2007 A. Marie
Villafatia
Acosta , Lourie,
Garcia
Epstein negotiations - you spent 12 hours working on drafts and you are
advising that the end of negotiation is nearing 46
9/18/2007 A. Marie
Villafatia
. I av Lefkowitz '
Email chain regarding draft agreements. Lefkowitz suggests plead to one count
of 1512, serve 12 months plus 1 year home confinement/supervised release,
followed by 2 years of probation with 6 months being community control.
Villafalia advises that USAO will not go below 18 months of prison/jail time.
9/18/2007
Rescheduled date for hearing on motion to quash subpoena for computer
equipment (initially set for 9/13/2007 )
9/18/2007
Andrew Louie,
Rolando Garcia' Karen Atkinson
A. Marie
Villafana I:mail re Draft Agreements with email from Jay Lefkowitz (9/18/07 ) attached 49
9/18/2007 10:45 am draft Plea Agreement
9/18/2007 12:07 pm draft Plea Agreement
Privileged Confidential Page 18 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit # 9/18/2007 12:22 pm draft Plea Agreement
9/18/2007 1:37pm draft Information
9/ 18/2007 Garcia, Villafaiia Lourie Email stating new terms that Louric negotiated with Lefkowitz
9/19/2007
A. Laurie, R.
Garcia, K. A. Marie
Villafana Email re negotiating strategy with attached correspondence l6
9/19/2007 A. A. Marie
Villafaiia A. Laurie Email re Epstein with internal U.S. Attorney 's Office emails attached 46
9/19/2007 A. Marie
Villafaria Jay Lefkowitz Forwarded to Laurie and R. Garcia - draft plea agreement issues l6
9/19/2007
Andrew Lourie,
Rolando Garcia,
Karen Atkinson
A. Marie
Villafana
Email re Draft Plea Agreement with email from Lefkowitz to Villafana
(9/19/07 ) and Lefkowitz to Villafana (9/19/07 ) attached 46
9/ 19/2007 Research re Federal Bureau of Prisons Designations
9/19/2007 11:46 am draft Information
9/20/2007 Belohlavek ,
Krischer Villafana Email chain discussing proposed joint meeting with Epstein 's counsel to
finalize all agreements
9/ 20/2007 Lourie Villafana Email forwarding federal plea agreement incorporating Acosta and Laurie
comments
9/20/2017 Laurie Villafalia Email chain discussing factual proffer in support of federal plea
9/20/2017 Acosta , Laurie Villafafia Email summarizing call with Lefkowitz in response to Lefkowitz call to Acosta
9/20/2007 1:17pm draft Plea Agreement
9/20/2007 3:52 pm draft Plea Agreement
9/20/2007 Villafafia Lourie Email stating that Lefkowitz wants to remove registration requirement
9/20/2007 Villafana Laurie Email asking Villafana to call Lefkowitz and inform him that Epstein must
plead to registrable offense
Privileged Confidential Page 19 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
9/21/20 (17 Lowrie, Garcia Villafaiia
Email informing Laurie of conversation with Lefkowitz about sex offender
registration issue
9/21/2007 Villafafia,
Belohlavek Krischer Email summarizing SAO negotiations with Goldberger , including
Goldberger 's request that Epstein not have to register as a sex offender
9/21/2007 Lourie, Garcia Villafana Email containing revised agreement incorporating some of Lefkowitz 's
language and highlighting 7755 negotiations
9/21/2007 Research re Florida Statutory Authorities and Bibliography 50
9/21/2007 2:05 pm draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
9/21/2007 Villafaiia, Garcia Laurie Response to email about Leficowitz's proposed language regarding
immigration proceedings
9/21/2007 4:47 pm Epstein state plea jpl edits (Lefkowitz )
9/23/2007
Acosta , Laurie,
Sloman,
Villafatia
Lefkowitz
Email admitting that defense based their agreement to plead to 796.03 on a
"mistaken assumption" and requesting that Epstein not have to register as a
sex offender
9/23/2007 Lefkowitz ,
Laurie, Villafaiia Acosta Email response to Lefkowitz instructing Lefkowitz to deal directly with Laurie
and Villafatia in negotiating agreement 51
9/23/2007 3:56 pm draft Non-Prosecution Agreement
9/23/2007 6:50 pm draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
9/23/2007 8:49 pm draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
9/24/2007 Acosta Sloman, Lowrie,
Garcia, Villafaiia Email containing Acosta edits to Agreement
9/24/2007 Villafaiia Lefkowitz Email - 1 page with nine page NPA (3 signature pages) attached
9/24/2007 Weinberg ,
Laurie, Garcia Villafafia Email containing Acosta 's final edits and asking to discuss potential victim
representative
9/24/2007
Acosta , Sloman,
Laurie, Garcia,
Atkinson
Villafafia Email containing final agreement as approved by both parties
Privileged Confidential Page 20 of 5 I Contains 6(c) Nlaterial
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit # 9/24/2007 9:04 am draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
9/ 24/2007 10:12 am draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
9/ 24/2007 2:14 pm draft Non-Prosecution Agreement
9/24/2007 4:20 pm draft Non -Prosecution Agreement
9/ 24/2007 NPA signed 32
9/24/2007 Acosta , Garcia,
Lourie Villafaiia Email containing signed agreement
9/ 25/2007 Scheduled date for Federal Indictment
9/30/2007 9/30/2007 -10/1/2007 Email chain between Villafafia and Lefkowitz re
telephone call with attached emails from 9/23/07 , 9/16/07 , and 9/15/07
10/1/2007 Folder entitled "(Victims) Additional 302's" containing reports of interviews
conducted in June 2007, October 2007, and March 2008
10/1/2007 10/1/2007 -10/31/2007 Additional negotiations regarding selection of Special
Master
10/1/2007 10/1 /2007-10/31 /2007 JD#1 Notified regarding signing of NPA
10/1/2007 10/1/2007 -10/31/2007 Investigation continues to try to identify addl victims
10/2/2007 Add'l client of Brad Edwards interviewed. She refuses to provide information.
(She provides information on a later date).
10/ 3/ 2007 Lefkowitz Villafafia Email - 2 pages with one page attachment, Proposal for Selection of Attorney
to Represent Victims C-6
10/5/2007 Villafafia Lefkowitz Email - 3 pages with four page unsigned letter from Lefkowitz to Villafafta C-6
10/5/2007 Sloman Villafafia Email forwarding letter from Lefkowitz re special master process C-6 10/7/2007 VilLsfaiia Sloman Email chain including
correspondence between Sloman and Sanchez
10/8/2007 Sloman Lilly Ann
Sanchez Letter - 3 pages
10/9/2007 Villafaiia Sloman Email attaching correspondence from Sanchez regarding Special Master
Process
10/9/2007 illy Ann LS
anchez Villafafia Email - 1 page with two page letter from Villafaha to Sanchez attached
Privileged Confidential Page 21 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
10/9/2007 -
3/25/2008
FBI Interview Reports of ----- (10/05/2007 , 3/20/2008 , and 3/25/2008 ), #2
(10/10/2007 ), #14 (10/26/2007 ), #33 (10/02/2007 ), #20 (10/25/2007 ),
#21 (10/03/2007 ), (10/03/2007 ), (10/02/2007 ), #40
(6/12/2007 ), and #35 (10/02/2007 )
B-31
1(1/10/2007 A(. ).t., Lefkowitz Letter - 6 pages
10/16/2007 -
10/23/2007
Emails between Marie Villafafia, Jeff Sloman, Alex Acosta , and Jay Lefkowitz
regarding Special Master C-7
10/22/2007 Lefkowitz Sloman Email - 3 pages with four page draft letter to Judge and two page
Addendum to the NPA , attached
10/23/2007 Acosta Lefkowitz Letter - 3 pages
10/23/2007
Sloman,
Villafafia Acosta Response to Leflcowitz's letter noting specific misrepresentation
10/24/2007 Lefkowitz ,
Acosta , Villafana Sloman Email - 1 page with two page Addendum to the NPA , and four page draft
letter to Judge , attached
10/25/2007 Lefkowitz Cyndee
Campos Email - 1 page with letter to Judge attached
10/25/2007 The Hon.
Edward B. Jeffrey Sloman Background information to Special Master to appoint attorney for victims
10/29/2007
Deadline date for Epstein 's plea and sentencing according to Non -Prosecution
Agreement
10/30/2007 Villafafia Sloman Email attaching final addendum
10/30/2007 Final executed Addendum to the Non-Prosecution Agreement
10/31/2007 Lefkowitz Sloman Email - 2 pages
11/1/2007
USAO extends deadline for Epstein 's plea and sentencing per request of
Epstein 's counsel
11/1/2007 Research re State Work Release
Privileged Confidential Page 22 of 5I Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
11/2/2007
Research re Florida Administrative Code Chapter 33-601. Classification of
Central Records: 33-601.602 Community Release Programs and 33-601.606
Placement of Inmates into Community Release Programs
11/5/2007 Lefkowitz Sloman Letter - 2 pages
11/8/2007 Jeffrey Sloman Jay Lefkowitz response to 11/5/07 letter stating that Epstein is complying fully with the
Non Prosecution Agreement (with Villafana handwritten notes)
11/13/2007 Jay Lefkowitz Jeffrey Slomantwo
Response to 11/8/07 letter stating that a guilty plea and sentencing more than
months beyond the original deadline is unacceptable. The agreement as to
the terms of the plea and sentencing and the new date for the change of plea
and sentencing is to be provided by 11/16/07 .
11/14/2007 Jeffrey Sloman Villafana Email regarding meeting with State Attorney 's Office about work release and
sex offender registration - ,
11/15/2007
Villafaiia,
Sloman, Garcia,
Acosta ,
Atkinson
Jason Richards 11/15/2007 -11/16/2007 Emails regarding research on work release - 6
11/16/2007 Sloman Lefkowitz Email - 1 Page
11/19/2007
Research re Florida Statute 921.143 Appearance of victim, next of kin, or law
enforcement , correctional, or correctional probation officer to make statement
at sentencing hearing; submission of written statement and Victim Notification
Request Form
B-7
11/19/2007 Plea Notification Letter B-2
11/23/2007 Unscheduled meeting between Jay Lefkowitz , Alan Dershowitz and Jeff
Sloman. (Drop in by Lefkowitz and Dershowitz )
11/26/2007 Jason Richards PBSO D/S Harold Elliott Research re work release: PBSO Post Orders for the Work Release Program
Privileged Confidential Page 23 of 5I Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
11/27/2007 Lefkowitz ,
Acosta , Villafatia Sloman Email responding to Lefkowitz 's statement in his letter that he needs to
conduct "due dilligence" on selection of Podhurst firm
11/27/2007 Plea Notification Letter at 7:11 pm )3-3
11/28/2007
A. Marie
Villafaiia, A.
Oosterbaan, R.
Garcia
A. Lourie Email re non-prosecution agreement with attached correpondence
11/28/2007
Alice S. Fisher,
Assistant
Attorney
General
Starr Letter - 3 pages re 18 U.S.C. 2255
11/28/2007
Lefkowitz ,
Acosta , Sloman' Lourie,
Oosterbaan
Villafana Email regarding Epstein 's plan to appeal to DC and proposed victim
notification letter
B-8
11/28/2007 Victim notification letter prepared 11/28/2007 at 9:42 pm B-4
11/29/2007 A. Marie
Villafalia Jeffrey Sloman
Request to draft letter that sets forth brief history and nature of the case,
followed by a chronology of the plea negotiations and vetting with CEOS that
results from those meetings, and how the civil resolution evolved.
11/29/2007 A. Marie
Villafaiia Jeffrey Sloman
Forward of email chain between Jeff Sloman and Andrew Lourie advising that
defense backtracked on two issues: They originally agreed to plead to the state
felony that they thought was unregisterable (but did not tell us knowing we
thought it was), but then discovered they were wrong and tried to get out of it.
They tried several times to knock down the jail time after agreeing to the time.
11/29/2007 Acosta Lefkowitz Letter - 4 pages, 4 page CVRA proposed notice letter attached B 9
Privileged Confidential Page 24 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
11/30/2007 Jay Lefkowitz R. Alexander
Acosta
Need to confer with A. Marie Villafafia and Jeffrey Sloman regarding
11/29/07 letter. Counsel has objected to several steps taken by the USAO to
effectuate the terms of the agreement and if Epstein is dissatisfied with the
Agreement, we stand ready to unwind the Agreement.
B I()
11/30/2007 Kenneth Starr Alex Acosta
Letter in response to 11/28/2007 letter to Assistant Attorney General Fisher.
Outlines the history of negotiations with various counsel for Epstein
illustrating how the Non -Prosecution Agreement was reached. Request to
provide definitive statement signed by Epstein of his intention to abide by
each and very term of the Agreement by dose of business on 12/14/2007 , or
will proceed with prosecution.
11/30/2007 Research re CVRA
12/1/2007 Victim notification letter prepared 12/1/2007 at 7:50 pm B-6 12/3/2007 Acosta Villafaiia Emails regarding research on proposed trust fund 55
12/4/2007 Kenneth Starr R. Alexander
Acosta
Response to 11/28/07 letter regarding concerns of Non -Prosecution
Agreement. The intent is to place the victims in the same position as they
would have been had Epstein been convicted at trial.
12/5/2007 R. Alexander
Acosta
Kenneth Starr
and Jay
Lefkowitz
Epstein reaffirms Non -Prosecution Agreement. Have no knowledge of
deadlines. Request for updated draft victim letters B-11
12/6/2007 Jay Lefkowitz Jeffrey Sloman
Concern about Epstein 's failure to set a timely plea and sentencing date. Still
have no received the terms of the Plea Agreement with the State Attorney 's
Office. There has been no contact with the press from our office or the FBI .
Letters to victims will be sent through the mail. Attached revised crime
victim's rights letter
It 12
12/ 6/ 2007 Lefkowitz Acosta Letter and facsimile transmission cover sheet re victim notification latter , B-12
12/6/2007 Lefkowitz Sloman Letter - 4 pages, 4 page CVRA proposed notice letter attached
12/6/2007 Starr Acosta Letter - 7 pages
Privileged Confidential Page 25 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
12/6/2007
Emails between Marie Villafana , Andrew Lourie, Cyndee Campos, Jeff
Sloman, Alex Acosta , Karen Atkinson, and Nesbitt Kuyrkendall regarding
correspondence from Ken Starr , request for a meeting with Epstein counsel,
and need to notify victims of upcoming plea
12/6/2007
12/6/2007 -12/7/2007 Emails between Marie Villafatia, Nesbitt Kuyrkendall,
Jason Richards, Jeff Sloman, Cyndee Campos, Annette Castillo, Karen
Atkinson, and Shawn Ball regarding request from State Attorney 's Office for
draft plea proffer
B-13
12/6/2007 Villafana Belchlank 12/6/2007 -12/7/2007 Emails between Villafana , Sloman, and Belohlavek
regarding a factual proffer for state plea 73
12/7/2007 Acosta , Fisher,
Sloman
Starr //.
Lefkowitz
Letter stating the defense will respond to Acosta letter by 12/10/07 , and
attaching " the independent ethics opinions of Judge Herbert J. Stern and Joe
D. Whitley "
12/7/2007 Alan Dershwitz Herbert J. Stem Letter - 27 pages
12/7/2007 Kenneth Starr R. Alexander
Acosta
Independent ethics opinions of Judge Herbert J. Stem and Joe D. Whitley
regarding the federal investigation of this matter and the Section 2255
component of the Agreement.
12/7/2007 Lilly Ann
Sanchez Jeffrey Sloman
Signed Affirmation of the Non-Prosection Agreement and Addendum. Plea
and sentencing hearing scheduled for 1/4/08 at 8:30 am before Judge Sandra
McSorley.
R I s
12/7/2007 Sloman Lilly Ann
Sanchez
Letter -1 pages with Affirmation signed by Epstein and Notice of Heating,
State of Florida I. Jeffrey Epstein , attached
12/7/2007 Victim notification letter prepared 12/7/2007 at 9:10 pm B-6
12/7/2007 Unmailed victim notification letters B-14
12/10/2007
Contacted counsel for JD#2/Individual #25 (paid for by Epstein ) to
determine if he still represented JD#2/Individual #25 and whether he should
receive upcoming victim notification
B-19
12/11/2007 Sloman and
Acosta Villafatia Email regarding call with Jim Eisenberg 8-20
Privileged Confidential Page 26 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
12/11/2007 R. Alexander
Mona
Kenneth Starr
and Jay
Lefkowitz
2 separate letters to address problems with case. Letter 1 - Federal
Investigators relied upon tainted evidence. Improper involvement and
conduct of Federal authorities (specifically names Villafana ). Letter 2 - Section
2255 and background of negotiations
12/11/2007 Epstein counsel object to including JD#2/Indivival #25 as "victim" and begin
their appeals to Washington , DC
12/12/2007 Complete indictment package marked "Originals 12/12/07 "
12/12/2007 Emails between Marie Villafatia, Frederica Devlin, and Bob Senior regarding
planning indictment review B-1(il
12/12/2007 Revised indictment package finalized
12/13/2007 Lefkowitz Villafaiia Letter - 5 pages
12/14/2007
Alex Acosta , Jeff
Sloman, Rolando
Garcia, and
Karen Atkinson
Mane Villafana Email with draft letters to State Attorney 's Office and victims B I -
12/14/2007 Draft Crime Victims' Rights - Notification of Resolution of Epstein
Investigation letter B I 6
12/14/2007
Research re Florida Procurement and Sentencing Guidelines (745 So.2d 979,
761 So.2d 474397 So.2d 741, 715 So.2d 274, 919 So.2d 695, 701 So.2d 1181,
711 So.2d 1290)
12/14/2007 Draft letter to Krischer from Acosta regarding Epstein filing as sex offender 69
12/14/2007 Acosta ; Sloman Villafan-a Email regarding Fl. Stat. 796.03 (procuring minors for prostitution ) and 18
U.S.C. 2255 74
12/17/2007 Acosta Lefkowitz Email responding to inquiry from 12/14/07 meeting about why defense had
waited so long to go to DC
Privileged Confidential Page 27 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
12/17/2007 Acosta Starr , Lefkowitz
110-page letter addressing inapplicability of procurement statute to Epstein 's
conduct, State Attorney 's Office's belief that Epstein should not have to
register inapplicability of 18 USC 2422 to Epstein 's conduct; and reiteration of
2255 concerns. Attachment: 7/6/07 Lefcourt letter Sloman, Menchel , Lourie,
and Villafafia with attachments
12/17/2007 Jeff Sloman Marie Villafafia Email inquiring about case status and informing Sloman regarding agent
concern about victim notification
B-18
12/19/2007
Alex Acosta , Jeff
Sloman, and
Janice
LaClainche
Marie Villafasia Email regarding challenge to state charge raised by Epstein counsel during
12/14/2007 meeting
B-19
12/19/2007 Lilly Ann
Sanchez Acosta Follow up letter from 12/14/07 meeting
12/20/2007
Emails between Marie Villafafia and Jeff Sloman regarding inquiries from State
Attorney 's Office regarding Epstein plea to state charge and facts supporting
state plea
12/21/2007 11. Al
Acostaer
exand Jay Lefkowitz
Knowledge of "list" of alleged victims is limited. Proposal deprives Epstein of
his opportunity to test the validity of these women's claims that would have
been extensively tested at trial.
B-21
12/26/2007 R. Alexander
Acosta Jay Lefkowitz
We do not object that some form of notice be given to the alleged victims. We
request the opportunity to review the notification. Believe they should be sent
by State Attorney 's Office instead of USAO . More arguments about 2255
language.
B-22
1/2/2008 Alex Acosta and
Jeff Sloman Marie Villafafia Email regarding renewed plea negotiations for federal plea agreement
1/2/2008 Alex Acosta and
Marie Villafaria Jeffrey Sloman Email regarding telephone conversation with State Attorney 's Office about
delay in Epstein state plea
Privileged Confidential Page 28 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
1/2/2008
Emails between Alex Acosta , Marie Villafatia, and Jeff Sloman regarding
requests from Alex Acosta to Marie Villafafia for information related to the
handling of the investigation by the State Attorney 's Office
1/3/2008
I :.mails between Marie Villafatia, Alex Acosta , and Jeff Sloman regarding Alex
Acosta telephone conference with Jay Lefkowitz where Lefkowitz admitted
that he never intended to have Epstein plead guilty to an offense that required
sex offender registration
1/4/2008 Scheduled date for Epstein 's self surrender according to the Non -Prosecution
Agreement
1/7/2008
Alex Acosta , Jeff
Sloman, Robert
Senior, Karen
Atkinson, and
Rolando Garcia
Marie Villafatia Email regarding proposed additional investigative steps in Epstein case B-102
1/8/2008 Trial date set for State of Florida vs. Epstein
i 9 , fiw,
1/9/2008 -1/14/2008 Emails between Marie Villafaila, Drew Oosterbaan,
Myesha Braden, Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, and Jason Richards regarding assigning a
CEOS attorney to the investigation, meeting with the CEOS attorney and
victims in Florida , the results of the meetings and planned additional meetings,
and revisions to the indictment in light of the meetings.
B-103
1/10/20 ” , Email chain between Myesha Braden and Marie Villafaila regarding meeting
on 1/11/2008 B-104
1/14/2008
Marie Villafatia,
E. Nesbitt
Kuyrkendall,
Jason Richards
Myesha Braden Email chain regarding meeting and additional 302s B-105
1/17/2008 Agents compile evidence for Bob Senior indictment review B-106
Privileged Confidential Page 29 of 5I Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
1/25/2008
Email chain between Myesha Braden and Marie Villafana regarding victim's
names in indictment
B-107
1/31/2008 Add'l grand jury subpoenas prepared and served B-108
1/31/2008
1/28/2008 -2/1/2008 Emails between Marie Villafafia, Jeff Sloman, Alex
Acosta , Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, Jason Richards, and Alan Santiago regarding
results of additional victim-witness interviews and requesting intervention with
CEOS to move review process along
B 109
1/31/2008 Sloman, Acosta Villafafia Email regarding victims C-1
2/12/2008
2/12/2008 -2/22/2008 Emails between Marie Villafatia, E. Nesbitt
Kuyrkendall, Jason Richards, and Myesha Braden re information for
indictment/ongoing investigation
B-110
2/19/2008 Complete indictment package, including 3rd Supplement to Pros memo
2/20/2008
2/20/2008 -2/21/2008 Emails between Drew Oosterbaan, Marie Villafafia,
Robert Senior, Jeff Sloman, Sigal Mandelker, Karen Atkinson, Alex Acosta ,
Rolando Garcia and Myesha Braden regarding status of CEOS plans to meet
with counsel for Epstein and status of indictment review
B-111
2/25/2008 Lefkowitz Sloman Email providing deadline for Epstein to perform
2/25/2008
Email chain between Marie Villafafia and Caroline Heck regarding use B 11,
of Grand Jury
2/25/2008
Jeff Sloman, Bob
Senior, Rolando
Garcia, Karen
Atkinson, and
Myesha Braden
Marie Villafafia Email re result of conferring with Caroline Heck about whether or not
to continue presentation to same grand jury or p to a different grand jury B 111
2/26/2008 Myesha Braden Marie Villafafia Email re CEOS independent review and concern about victim's names being
released B
-I 14
Privileged Confidential Page 30 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
2/26/2008 Sloman, Senior Villafatia Email response with concerns regarding allowing Epstein to keep the same
deal as before R I I;
2/27/2008 Lefkowitz Sloman Email - 2 pages
2/27/2008 Email chain between Marie Villafatia, David Weinstein , and Bob Senior re
email to the Civil Rights Chief B Ill,
2/28/2008 Entails between Marie Villafafia and Susan Roe regarding related investigation,
potential investigatory leads, and CEOS review
2/28/2008 Email chain between Marie Villafain, Jason Richards, and E. Nesbitt
Kuyrkendall regarding further investigation R 1 i -
2/29/2008 Acoqa Lefkowitz Email - 1 page
2/29/2008 Emails between Jeff Sloman, Marie Villafafia, Robert Senior, and David
Weinstein regarding continuing investigation and status of CEOS review li I I',
3/1/2008 ' FBI Reports of March 2008 interviews of additional wimess/victitn located in
New York
3/1/2008 Folder entitled "(Victims) Additional 302's" containing reports of interviews
conducted in June 2007, October 2007, and March 2008
3/5/2008
Emails between Marie Villafain and E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall with attached
email to Alex Acosta , Jeff Sloman, Drew Oosterbaan, Robert Senior, Myesha
Braden, Rolando Garcia, and Karen Atkinson regarding meeting in DC,
additional information to prepare for meeting, and new information from
ongoing investigation
B 121
3/7/2008 Lefkowitz Oosterbaan Email - 2 pages
3/10/2008 Lefkowin Oosterbaan Email - 2 pages
3/10/2008 Oosterbaan Lefkowitz Email - 1 page
3/10/2008
3/10/2008 -3/12/2008 Emails between Marie Villafatia, Robert Senior,
Myesha Braden, Krishna Patel, Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, E.J.Yen, and Karen
Atkinson about Epstein attempts to contact victims and finding counsel for
victims
B-23
3/12/2008 Sub oena to ---- return date 4/15/08
3/12/2008 Subpoena to (return date 4/15/08 )
3/12/2008 Villafalia Kuyrkendall Email re affidavit for the memory cards B-119
Privileged Confidential Page 31 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
.3/12/2008
3/12/2008 -3/17/2008 Emails between Marie Villafatia, Nesbitt Kuyrkendall
and E.J. Yera regarding search warrant application and execution of search
warrant
3/13/2008 Sigal Mandelker Lefkowitz Email - 2 pages (CEOS )
3/14/2008
Emails between Marie Villafaila, Rolando Garcia, Karen Atkinson, Frederica
Devlin, and Shawn Ball regarding complete indictment package for Robert
Senior final review
B-27/B-
3/14/2008 Revised indictment package B-25
3/17/2008 Search warrants for digital camera memory cards B-120
3/18/2008
Grand Jury presentation materials and testimony of Special Agent E. Nesbitt
Kuyrkendall
B-26
3/19/2008
Email chain between Marie Villafaiia, David Weinstein , Jeff Simian, Bob
Senior, Karen Atkinson, and Rolando Garcia with Epstein update from grand
jury presentation and grant from the Justice Department to provide legal
representation to victims
C-2
3/19/2008
3/19/2008 -3/22/2008 Emails regarding victims being harassed by Epstein 's
investigators
( ;
3/20/2008 Vilialana Richard H.
Willits Letter that he is representing Individual #3
3/21/2008 Responses to addil_grand jury subpoenas received
3/25/2008 Planned grand jury presentation (moved to 4/15/2008 then to 4/29/2008 )
3/28/2008 Sigal Mandelker Starr Letter - 5 pages (CEOS ) B-28
3/28/2008 Villafalia Danchuk Letter advising of representation of Individual #3 and that a lawsuit has been
filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court B-41
4/1/2008 Jay Lefkowitz Jeffrey Sloman Draft letter regarding termination of agreement
Privileged Confidential Page 32 of 51 Contains 6(c) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
4/2/2008
Emails between Marie Villafatia, Alex Acosta , Jeff Sloman, Karen Atkinson,
Robert Senior, Rolando Garcia, and Nesbitt Kuyrkendall regarding efforts by
Jay Lefkowitz and Ken Starr to speak with Alex Acosta and instructions to
direct question to Marie Villafaila and Karen Atkinson
4/8/2008 Sigal Mandelker Starr Letter - 4 pages (CEOS )
4/9/2008 Willits Villafalla Letter in response to 3/28/08 letter from Willits B-42
4/21/2008
4/21/2008 -5/9/2008 Emails between Marie Villafaiia, Jeff Sloman, Karen
Atkinson, Bob Senior, E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, Jason Richards, and Drew
Oosterbaan re status of grand jury presentation, and ongoing investigation,
and delay
B-124
4/22/2008
Office of
Professional
Responsibility
A. Marie
Villafafia Letter re Self-Report of Allegation of Conflict of Interest
4/28/2008 Sigal Mandelker Starr Letter - 4 pages (CEOS )
4/29/2008 Operation Leap Year Revised Indictment Summary chart (by Victim) and
Grand Jury presentation Operation Leap Year B-29
4/2 9/ 2008 Draft Indictment 8-30 5/6/2008 Subpoena to Leigh Ann Murray (return date 5/6/08 )
5/14/2008 Asst Atty
General Fisher Starr Letter - 4 pages (CEOS )
5/15/2008 Jay Leflcowitz Andrew G.
Oosterbaan Federal prosecution would not be improper or inappropriate. It -24
5/15/2008 CEOS and DAAG Fisher complete review of Epstein 's appeal
5/15/2008
5/15/2008 -5/27/2008 Emails between Marie Villafatia, Karen Atkinson, Bob
Senior, Jeff Sloman, and agents regarding indictment review and status of
investigation
B-125
5/19/2008 Acosta Lefkowitz Email - 3 pages B-35
5/1 9/ 2008 AttvDeputy ' General Filip Starr /Whidey Letter - 8 pages 8-33
Privileged Confidential Page 33 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
5/19/2008 Lefkowitz Cyndee
Campos Email - 1 page with 5/19/08 letter attached B-35
5/ 19/2008 Lefkowitz Sloman Letter - 6 pages B-35
5/19/2008
Lefkowitz , cc:
Sloman and
Villafatia
Acosta Response email to Lefkowitz 's 5/19/08 email re Drew Oosterbaan letter,
which is attached
B-36
5/19/2008
Kirldand & Ellis LLP, Response to Letter by FAUSA Sloman dated
5/19/2008 - 10 pages
B-37
5/19/2008 Lefkowitz Sloman Letter setting June 2, 2008 deadline to comply with terms and conditions of
the NPA
B-32
5/27/2008 Honorable Mark
Filip , DAG Kenneth Starr Request for independent review of Epstein matter B-33
5/27/2008
Emails between A. Marie Villafana and Karen Atkinson regarding report of
new state plea deal for J. Epstein
11-39
5/27/2008
Emails between A. Marie Villafaiia, Robert Senior, Jeff Sloman, and Karen
Atkinson regarding potential renewed plea negotiations for J. Epstein and
plans to review and review updated indictment package
R ', K
5/27/2008 -
6/13/2008
Internal emails after CEOS letter rejecting appeal where Marie Villafaiia asks
to indict and Jeff/Alex advise Epstein will be given chance to perform
B m
5/28/2008 Atkinson,
Villafana , Garcia Villafana , Sloman Email chain regarding information from Barry Krischer , the State Attorney
5/28/2008 Lefkowitz Sloman Email - 1 page
5/28/2008 Soman,
Villafana Atkinson Email chain regarding Epstein 's request to do less time than 18 months
5/29/2008
Villafalia, Senior;
cc: Atkinson,
Kuyrkendall,
Richards
Sloman Email regarding DAG decision to consider Epstein 's "appeal" and that GJ for
Tuesday is off
B-40
Privileged Confidential Page 34 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
5/30/2008 FBI -302 of 5/28/08 Interview of Individual #35 13-126
6/2/2008 Villafatia Sloman Draft letter to DAG B-127
6/3/2008 Honorable Mark
Filip , DAG Kenneth Starr Submission with documents for independent review
6/3/2008 Starr /Whitley John Roth Letter - 1 page
6/3/2008 Honorable Mark
Filip , DAG Sloman 2nd draft letter to DAG B 12'1
6/3/2008 Draft letter to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip regarding reasons to
approve continued prosecution of J. Epstein B-128
6/6/2008 Emails between Marie Villafafia and E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and subpoena
issued to victim/witness and need for additional subpoenas B-129
6/17/2008 Application for 6001 immunity for grand jury witness B-130
6/17/2008
Acosta , Sloman,
Senior,
Atkinson, Garcia
Villafalia Email summarizing meeting with Krischer regarding Epstein 's attempt to
negotiate a new plea deal 78
6/18/2008 Villafafia Senior Email regarding call with Roy Black and response that Washington has not
made a final decision
6 18/2008
Emails between A. Marie Villafafia, Robert Senior, Alex Acosta , Jeff Sloman,
Rolando Garcia, and Karen Atkinson regarding telephone conference with
Roy Black about allowing.). Epstein to accept state plea to 60 days'
imprisonment
6/18/2008 Notes from call to Brad Edwards , counsel for #43, and notes from message to
Roy Black and message from Roy Black B-43
6/19/2008 Barry Krischer ;
Karen Atkinson \ ill.it.ina Email re wrapping up the case 68
Privileged Confidential Page 35 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
6/19/2008 Honorable Mark
Filip , DAG Kenneth Starr Additional documents for independent review
6/19/2008 John Roth Stephanie D.
Thacker Letter - 14 pages
6/20/2008 Request to travel to New York for witness interviews in June 2008 and
subpoena B-132
6/23/2008 Lefkowitz / Starr John Roth Letter - 1 page 8-44
6/23/2008
Emails between Jeff Sloman, Bob Senior, and Marie Villafatia instructing
Marie Villafaiia to inform Epstein 's attorneys that he had until June 30 to enter
a guilty plea and Villafafia email to Lefkowirz re same
B-49
6/23/2008
Villafaiia,
Kuyrkendall,
Richards, cc:
Atkinson
Senior Email regarding New York Jane Doe and awaiting a response from DAG's
office
6/23/2008
Emails between A. Marie Villafafia, E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, J. Richards, K.
Atkinson, and R. Senior regarding grand jury subpoena to victim/witness ,
revisions to indictment, planned grand jury presentation, and plans to
supersede indictment
IS Ill
6/23/2008 DAG Filip completes review of Epstein 's appeal
6/23/2008 6/23/2008 -6/26/2008 Emails between Marie Villafaiia and grand jury witne,
regarding immunity and travel for grand jury appearance
B 13d
6/24/2008 Letter from Matthew W. Friedrich, Acting Assistant Attorney General
authorizing application for a court order granting 6001 immunity P, 1 'd
6/24/2008 Villafaiia Sloman Email re discussion about going to the change of plea regarding Jeffrey
Epstein
6/24/2008 Villafaiia; cc:
Jack Goldberger Roy Black Email chain regarding wrap up call B-45
Privileged Confidential Page 36 of 5 I Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
6/25/2008 Villafafia Sloman Email regarding having telephone discusion about 2255 issue and to discuss
plea 8
6/25/2008 Villafafia Sloman Email with revised victim notification letter IS-47
6/25/2008
Emails between A. M. Villafaria , J. Sloman, R. Senior, K Atkinson, and A.
Acosta regarding draft of notification of victim list for J. Epstein counsel with
attached drafts
8-48
6/26/2008 Black and
Goldberger Villafafia Email re proposed plea agreement and date and time of change of plea
6/26/2008 Villafaria Sloman Email regarding factual proffer
6/26/2008 Fax from FBI with victim list B-SO
6/27/2008 Black and
Goldberger Villafaria Letter regarding plea agreement between Epstein and SA and that the
proposed sentencing provision does not comply with the terms of the NPA
6/27/2008 Black and
Goldberger Villafaria Emails between Villafana and Black/Goldberger about problems with state
plea agreement 77
6/27/2008 Counsel for Epstein advise USAO of Epstein state court change of plea on
6/30/08 BSI
6/27/2008 AUSA Villafafia notifies Attorney Edwards of upcoming change of plea and
urges his clients to attend
6/27/2008 USAO notifies Palm Beach Police Chief Reiter of upcoming change of plea.
He states intention to notify as many victims as possible of hearing. 8-53
6/27/2008 Research re State Work Release
6/27/2008 Sloman,
Atkinson Villafalia Email inquiring about conversation with Chief Reiter B-52
6/27/2008 Sloman Villafafia Email summarizing conversation with Goldberger that Epstein would serve
sentence in confinement "24-hours-a-day" 79
6/28/2008
Emails between A. M. Villafalia, J. Sloman, A. Acosta , and IL Senior regarding
correspondence with J. Goldberger and proposed change to state plea
agreement
6/29/2008 \ 'illafafia Kuyrkendall Email regarding work release 80
Privileged Confidential Page 37 of Si Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
6/30/2008 Villafatia Mycsha Braden Email chain regarding Epstein sentencing
6/30/2008 Villafatia Susan Roc Email chain regarding news article
6/30/2008 Villataria Ted Leopold Email chain with response to 6/30/08 email from Villafana with contact
info don
6/30/2008 Emails between Marie Villafana and attorney for grand jury wimess
withdrawing subpoena B-I35
6/30/2008
Epstein enters guilty plea in state court in accordance with NPA .
JD#1/Individual #43, JD#2/Individual #25, and counsel do not appear. ASA
and counsel for Epstein disclose to state court judge existence of NPA , which
is later incorporated into state court record.
6/30/2008 Notcs from calls to Michael Danchuk and Richard Willets, Jeff Herman, Brad
Edwards , Ted Leopold, and Mike Dutko B-55
6/30/2008 Research re State Work Release
6/30/2008 Draft notification of identified victims letters to Guy Lewis , Jack Goldberger ,
and Roy Black
B 5(
6/30/2008 Villafafia Oosterbaan Email regarding Epstein guilty plea and sentencing 71
6/30/2008 2008-2009 Epstein serves prison term
7/1/2008 Smachetti Villafana Email response stating that Villafana handled Epstein case but did not come
up with the 18-month deal
7/1/2008 Villatatia Anne Schultz Email regarding Epstein plea
7/1/2008 Villatatia Smachetti Email chain regarding Epstein case
7/3/2008
Col. M. Gauger,
Palm Beach
Sheriffs Office
A. Marie
Villafana Email re Epstein work release with attachment
7/3/2008 Sloman Villafaila Email re victim's lawyer
7/3/2008 Villafatia Brad Edwards
and Jay Howell Letter advising of representation of Epstein victims
7/3/2008 Villatafia Ted Leopold Email advising client names
Privileged Confidential Page 38 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
7/3/2008 Villafafia; cc:
Acosta c.1/01),In Email response to 7/3/08 email from Villafafia regarding victims' lawyer
7/3/2008
Emails between A. M. Villafafia, J. Sloman, and A. Acosta regarding telephone
conference with B. Edwards and regarding meeting with Sheriffs Office about
work release program
s I
7/7/2008 JD#1/Individual #43 files "Emergency Petition"
7/7/2008 Notes from calls to Mike Dutko, Brian Poulton, ASA, and Ted Leopold
7/7/2008 Notes of phone call with Roy Black held some time between 7/7/08 and
9/19/08
7/8/2(07;
D. Lee , A.
Acosta , J.
Sloman
A. Marie
Villafafia
Email regarding victim notification letter provided to counsel for J. Epstein on
11/28/2007 with attachment
7/8/2008 Goldberger Villafafia Letter re victim notification letters B-57
7/8/2008
Lee , Sloman, cc:
Villafafia,
Jacobus
Acosta Email with attached second draft of response in Jane Doe case
7/8/200s Villafafia Goldberger Letter that he will respond on 7/9/08 B-58
7/9/2008
1 costa, Sloman,
Atkinson; cc:
Kuyrkendall and
Richards
Villafaila Email regarding response to Goldberger letter B-59
7/9/2008 Goldberger Villafafia Response to Goldberger 's 7/9/08 letter re notification of identified victims B-60
7/9/2008
Lee , Villafalia,
Acosta ; cc:
Atkinson,
Jacobus
Sloman Email chain regarding confidentiality provision and filing under seal for victim
response
7/9/2008 Villafafia Goldberger Letter re Notification of Identified Victims B-61
7/9/2008 Victim Notification letters to Individuals #35 and #43 via Brad Edwards B-66
Privileged Confidential Page 39 of SI Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
7/9/2008 Govt responds to "Emergency Petition"
7/10/2008 Goldberger Villafafia Letter stating that government will provide victim notifications on a rolling
basis B-62
7/10/2008 Villafalia Goldberger Letter requesting list of all victims B-64
7/10/2008 Goldberger Villafatia Letter with final notification of identified victims B-63
7/10/2008
Villafafia,
Acosta ,
Atkinson, cc:
Kuyrkendall,
Richards
Sloman Email regarding proposed response to Goldberger B 65
7/10/2008
Victim Notification letters to Individuals #3 (via Richard H. Willits), #8 (via
Jeffrey Herman), ##17 (via Theodore J. Leopold), #25 (via Jeffrey Herman),
#26 (via Jeffrey Herman), #37 (via Michael E. Dutko), and #44 (via Jeffrey
Herman)
B-67
7/11/2008 Hearing before Judge Marra
7/14/2008
7/14/2008 -7/15/2008 Emails between A. M. Villafaria , E. Nesbitt
Kuyrkendall, J. Richards, and T. Smith regarding FBI victim notifications and
guidance regarding language to use and information to provide
B 6',
7/17/2008
Villafafia,
Acosta ,
Atkinson, Lee
Sloman Email chain with revised draft of Tein letter
7/17/2008 Letter to Tein with attached fax cover sheet and transmission report
7/17/2008 Tein and
Goldberger Villafaila Letter re Notice of Continued Pendency of Federal Criminal Action
7/18/2008
7/18/2008 -7/21/2008 Emails between A. M. Villafacia, J. Sloman, E. Nesbitt
Kuyrkendall, J. Richards, D. Lee , and IC Atkinson regarding preparation of
victim notification letters, victim contact list, filing of victim notification letter
in a civil proceeding, and contact by B. Edwards with one victim opining that
sentence imposed was insufficient
B-69
Privileged Confidential Page 40 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
7/19/2008 Emails with other AUSAs in other districts and documents regarding
disclosing identifying information about victims
7/21/2008 Goldberger Villafafia Letter with 11 additional victim notification letters
7/21/2008 Villafaila Goldberger Letter with attached Motion for Return of Property
7/21/2008 Villafaiia Kuyrkendall Email with list of victims that Twiler still needs to make contact with It 6')
7/21/2008 Villafaiia Tein Letter in response to 7/17/08 letter from Villafaiia
7/21/2008 Victim Notification letters to Individuals #1, #2, #4, #13, #9, #14, #21, #23,
#30, #32, and #38
7/21/2008 Villafaiia; cc:
Senior Sloman Email response to Vilkfaiia's 7/21/08 email regarding Motion for Return of
Property in State Court
7/22/2008 Villafaiia K tz% rkcndall Email chain regarding victim addresses
7/22/2008
Emails between A. M. Vitiate's, A. Acosta , J. Sloman, R. Senior, K. Atkinson,
E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, and J. Richards regarding 7/21/2008 letter from M.
Tein announcing plan to stay the civil suits against J. Epstein and notification
that B. Reinhart is counts! of record for S. Kellen in civil suits
7/23/2008 Emails between A. M. Villafaria and D. Lee regarding correspondence with
counsel for]. Epstein and notice of breach
7/25/2008 Emails between A. M. Villafaria and K. Atkinson regarding extension of grand
jury to allow for continued representation of J. Epstein case
7/30/2008 Villafaiia Atkinson Email regarding contact with Roy Black
7/30/2008 Villafaria Roy Black Email chain regarding call relating to the performance of the criminal Non-
Prosecution Agreement
8/1/2008
Lee , Acosta ; cc:
Villafaiia,
Jacobus, Senior
Sloman Email chain regarding Jane Doe litigation
8/2/2008 Lee , Villafaiia Acosta Email re: Letter from Brad Edwards
8/5/2008
A. Acosta , J.
Sloman R. ,
Senior, and K.
Atkinson
A. Marie
Villafalia
Email regarding analysis of Jeffrey Epstein agreement, with attached
6/24/2008 email from A. M. Villafaiia to R. Black and J. Goldberger and
attached Epstein agreement
It - 1
Privileged Confidential Page 41 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
8/5/2008
Villafaiia, Senior,
Sloman, Lee , cc:
Atkinson
Acosta Email with attached suggestions to Superseding Non -Prosecution Agreement B-72
8/6/2008
Villafatia,
Acosta , Sloman,
Atkinson
Senior Email regarding filing in state court case
8/7/2008 Villafana Roy Black Email responding to 8/7/08 email providing notification of possible
compelled disclosure of the Non -Prosecution Agreement B-73
8/6/2008 Villafatia Senior Response regarding Roy Black 's response to email B-74
8/12/2008 Villafafia Senior Response to request for conference call prior to call with Roy Black B-75
8/13/2008
Atkinson,
Acosta , Sloman,
Lee , cc: Villafaiia
Senior Email re Epstein and call with Jay B-76
8/13/2008
Atkinson,
Senior, Sloman,
Lee , cc: Villafafia
Acosta Email response regarding final version of agreement B-77
8/13/2008 Lefkowitz Villafafia Letter regarding performance of the N PA 8-78
8/13/2008 Research re PBSO rules and regulations
8/13/2008
8/13/2008 -8/15/2008 Emails between A. Acosta , K. Atkinson, R.. Senior, J.
Sloman, D. Lee , and A. M. Villafafia regarding scope of Epstein agreement
and correspondence and telephone conference with J. Lefkowitz
B-79
8/14/2008 Villafana -;enior Email response to 8/14/08 email from Villafaiia advising Dexter disagrees
with strategy
8/14/2008 Villafana , cc:
Atkinson Lefkowitz Email re Follow up point regarding victims B-80
8/14/2008 Status Conf before Judge Marra
Privileged Confidential Page 42 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
8/15/2008
Acosta ,
Villafafia,
Sloman, Lee ,
Atkinson
Senior Email questioning whether offer should be withdrawn as opposed to
considering it a nullity 13-81
8/15/2008
Email chain between Villafaiia, Acosta , Sloman, Senior, Atkinson, and Lee re
draft response to 8/15/2008 email from Jay Leflcowitz regarding
implementation of the NPA
13-82
8/15/2008 Lefkowitz and
Black Villafaiia Letter re terms of NPA 13-83
8/15/2008 Villafatia, cc:
Atkinson Le&owitz Email re Follow up point with attached entails from 8/14/08
8/18/2008 Villafaiia Leflcowitz Letter re restitution 13-84
8/21/2008 Leflcowitz and
Black Villafafia Letter re Special Master and draft Notification of Identified Victim B-85
8/22/2008 Villafatia Lefkowitz Letter re misstatements in 8/21/08 Villafafta letter B-86
8/22/2008 Draft Victim Notification letter to Michael E. Dutko re Individual #37
8/25/2008 Emails between A. M. Villafafia, A. Acosta , J. Sloman, R. Senior, K. Atkinson,
and D. Lee regarding letter received from J. Leflcowitz
8/26/2008 Lefkowitz and
Black Villafatia Letter re victim's list B-87
8/26/2008 Villafaiia, cc:
Acosta , Senior Sloman Email regarding changes to letter to Jay
9/2/2008 Villafatia Lefkowitz Letter agreeing that Goldberger should be listed as the contact person and re
Josfsberg's fees B-88
9/2/2008 Emails between A. M. Villafaiia, D. Lee , R. Senior, and J. Sloman regarding
revised victim notification
Privileged Confidential Page 43 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
Mailed Amended Victim Notification letters to Individuals #1, #2, #3 (via
9/2/2008
Richard H. Willits), #4, #13, #8 (via Jeffrey Herman), #9, #10, #11, #14,
#16, #17 (via Theodore Leopold), #20, #21, #23, #24, #25 (via Jeffrey B-89
Herman), #26 (via Jeffrey Herman), #30, #31, #32, #33, #37 (via Michael E.
Dutko), #38, #44 (via Jeffrey Herman)
9/3/2008 Victim notification letters to Individuals #36, #35 (via Brad Edwards ), #42,
#43 (via Brad Edwards ) B ()c
Email chain regarding Epstein and recommendation on working with same 9/8/2008 Villafana Susan Roe team
Michael 9/12/2008 Villafatia Danchuk Letter requesting copy of the settlement agreement
9/12/2008 Notification of Identified Victim letter. Individual #39 B-91
9/15/2008 Michael
Danchuk Villafafia Letter in response to 9/12/08 letter from Danchuk
9/15/2008 Mailed victim notification letters for Individuals #18 and #32 B-92
9/17/2008 - Emails and coorespondence with The Florida Bar re victim notifications B-93 11/4/2008
9/16/2008 - Emails between Villafafia, Krischer , Belohlavek , Garcia, Sloman, and Atkinson 70
9/17/2008 regarding Palm Beach Daily News requesting copy of the NPA and discussion
9/17/2008
Lefkowitz ,
Black, and Villafatia Letter re Palm Beach Daily News requesting information about the NPA
Goldberger
9/17/2008
Villafaila,
Acosta , Senior,
Lee , Atkinson
•1( )man Email chain regarding obligation to sealing NPA
9/19/2008 Notes of calls to Bob Josefsberg
Email agreeing with Villafalia's 10/8/08 email that a copy of the Response to 10/8/2008 Villafatia Senior Jane Does ' Motion to Unseal the NPA should
be mailed
to Epstein 's attorneys
Privileged Confidential Page 44 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
19/8/2008 Villafaiia Slornan Email response to Villafafia's 10/8/08 email advising to send a copy of
pleading to Roy and Jay
10/8/2008
Villafaiia, Roy
Black , cc:
Atkinson, Lee
Lefkowitz
Email thanking Villafaiia for fowarding United States' Response to Petitioners'
Motion to Unseal the Non -Prosecution Agreement with attached email from
10/8/08
10/16/2008
Villafaiia, Roy
Black , cc:
Atkinson, Lee
Lefkowitz Email thanking Villafaila for forwarding the reply brief filed by Brad Edwards
with attached 10/16/08 email
10/2 3/ 2008
10/23/2008 -5/27/2008 ? Emails between A. Marie illafafia, Nesbitt
Kuyrkendall, and J. Richards regarding plans to meet to prepare for indictment
presentation, service of grand jury subpoenas, interviews of additional
witnesses , and plea negotiation issue
10/27/2008 Villafafia Myesha Braden Email chain titled Things to do in West Palm
11/4/2008 Villafafia Senior Email thanking Villafatia for her 11/3/08 email advising she spoke with the
Florida Bar
11/4/2008 Correspondence from Florida Bar Ethics Counsel regarding Florida Ethics
Rules involved in distributing victim notification letters
11/14/2008 Notification of Identified Victim letters to Individuals #20, #40 B 9 I
11/17/2008 Villafaiia Lefkowitz Email chain regarding meeting
11/19/2008
Villafaiia; cc:
Katherine W.
Ezell and Amy
Eden
Robert C.
Josefsberg Email with list of Epstein victims and representation
11/20/2008 Villafaiia Senior Email response to Villafaiia's 11/20/08 email advising that Epstein is on work
release and request to indict him 82
11/21/2008
Villafaiia,
Acosta , Sloman,
Atkinson; cc:
Garcia
Senior Email advising Jeff Sloman is in agreement with approach and next steps 82
11/24/2008 Roy Black Villafafia Letter re work release program and research
Privileged Confidential Page 45 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
11/26/2008 Villafafia and cc:
Atkinson Roy Black Email stating that Jeffrey Epstein has not breached his Non -Prosecution
Agreement by performing work release
11/26/2008
Emails between A. M. Villafafia, J. Sloman, and R. Senior regarding email from
It. Black about work release
12/3/2008 Villafalia Lefkowitz Email that he will not be attending meeting with Roy Black
12/4/2008 Villafatia Atkinson Email with attached draft letter to notify victims of Epstein 's work release B-95
12/4/2008 Villafaiia; cc:
Sloman Roy Black Email with attached Motion to Correct Sentence
12/5/2008 Brad Edwards ,
Esq. Villafaiia Email with attached Work Release Notice B-96
— 12/5/2008 Herman Villafafia Email with attached Work Release Notice B-96
12/5/2008
Lefkowski,
Villafaiia; cc:
Atkinson
Roy Black
Email response to 12/5/08 email from Villafafia advising that Brad Edwards
filed the Non-Prosecution Agreement in the Jane Doe case and has asked the
Court to unseal it
12/5/2008 Robert C.
Josefsberg Villafana Email with attached Work Release Notice B-96
12/5/2008 Ted Leopold Villafatia Email with attached Work Release Notice B-96
12/5/2008 Villafalia Sloman Email advising no objections to the draft letter for work release notice
attached to Villafafia's 12/4/08 email
12/5/2008 Willits Villafaiia Email with attached Work Release Notice B 96
12/8/2008
Spencer Kuvin,
Jack Scarola ,
Michael Dutko,
#11, #39
Villafalia Email with attached Work Release Notice p, ir
12/8/2008 Notification of Work Release Letter to Individual #40 It ')-
12/8/2008 Florida Statute 796.03 Procuring person under age of 18 for prostitution
12/8/2008 Florida Statute 775.0837 Habitual misdemeanor offenders
Privileged Confidential Page 46 of 51 Contains 6(c) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
12/8/2008 Florida Statute 796.07 Prohibiting prostitution , etc.: evidence; penalties;
definitions
12/9/2008 Notification of Work Release letters to Individuals #4, #10, #16, #18, #23,
#24, #33, #38, #30 (personal note), #42 B-98
12/9/2008 Research re false statements on Epstein 's application for work release 83
12/10/2008 Villafaria Senior Email requesting to speak with Villafafia regarding article about Epstein 's work
release
12/10/2008 Villafafia Sloman Email re Epstein work release letter
12/11/2008
Captain David
Sleeth, Palm
Beach Sheriffs
Office
A. Marie
Villafaiia
Letter regarding Work Release Application of Jeffrey Epstein stating that there
are some inaccuracies and omissions in Mr. Epstein 's file.
‘.\ 4
12/11/2008 Villafafia, cc:
Senior Sloman Email advising a copy of the letter should be sent to Mr. Black
12/11/2008 Villafaiia ,
Sloman Senior Email chain regarding sending copy of letter to Mr. Black
12/12/2008 Villataria; cc: . Mitch Kitroser Spencer Kuvin Email response advising he will consult with client in response to Villatalia's
12/11/08 email re: Epstein work release
12/12/2008 Notification of Work Release letter to #42 8-100
12/12/2008 -
12/29/2008 Emails with attorneys for victims regarding Epstein work release It 'F)
12/15/2008
Villafaiia,
Sloman,
Atkinson, cc:
Kuyrkendall,
Richards
Senior Email chain regarding articles about Epstein
2/3/2009 Roy Black Josefsberg Email re payment
Privileged Confidential Page 47 of SI Contain): 6(c) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
2/11/2009
Amy Ederl,
Evelyn Sheehan,
Katherine W.
Ezell, Bert
Patton
Josefsberg Email chain regarding payment and client's position
2/13/2009 Josefsberg Lefkowitz Letter re invoices are for services exceeding scope of services for which
Epstein agreed to pay for
2/20/2009 Lefkowitz Josefsberg Response to 2/13/09 Lefkowitz letter
3/3/2009 Josefsberg Lefkowitz Response to 2/20/09 Josefsberg letter
6/8/2009 Robert Critton Katherine W.
Ezell Letter re payment
6/9/2009 Sloman, Senior, Garcia, Atkinson Villafana Memorandum re Operation Leap Year: Request to Provide Notification of
Breach 85
6/9/2009 File folder entitled "6/9/09 Signed Indictment" containing signed indictment
package dated 6/9/2009 with corrections 86
6/9/2009 Indictment package signed again for presentation on 6/16/2009
6/11/2009 Villafatia Katherine W.
I lizell Email re letter from Critton Denying any fees and hearing on 6/12/09
6/12/2009 Goldberger \ illafafia Letter re violation of NPA 87
6/12/2009 Villafaila 1.efkowitz
Letter re response to Villafaila 6/12/09 letter giving notice of breach with
attached Defendant Jeffrey Epstein 's Notice of Withdrawal of Arguments I
through VII of the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended
Complaint
6/12/2009 File folder entitled "6/12/09 Victim Notif. Log: containing chart with victim
contact information and attorney notes regarding dates and type of contacts
6/12/2009 Transcript of Motion Hearing before judge Marra
6/15/2009
Lefkowitz ,
Black, and
Goldberger
N'illafatia Letter regarding history of Epstein 's performance under the NPA 88
Privileged Confidential Page 48 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
6/15/2009 Villafalia Lefkowitz Letter re Josefsberg 's fees
6/16/2009 Villafafia KaKatherine
Ell W. Email with attachment
6/17/2009 Lefkowitz Villafafia Letter in response to Lefkowitis 6/15/09 letter ,..,)
6/19/2009 Villafafia Lefkowitz Letter re discussion regarding ongoing obligations per NPA
7/6/2009 Villalatia Spencer Kuvin Letter requesting copy of NPA
7/7/2009 Lefkowitz Villafarla- Letter in response to 6/19/09 letter
7/8/2009 Villafafia Critton Letter rc NPA with attached Defendant Epstein 's Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiffs Complaint (Jane Doe #8)
7/31/2009 Villafatia Spencer Kuvin Letter with follow up request for NPA
8/4/2009 Spencer Kuvin Villafana Letter in response to request for NPA
8/5/2009 Respondent BB's Motion to Supplement the Record (4D09-2554)
8/20/2009 Jeffrey Epstein 's Response to Motion to Supplement the Record (4D09-2554)
9/1/2009 Roy Black A. Marie
Villafaria
Draft of letter regarding breach of Non Prosecution Agreement with
handwritten attorney (Villafana ) notes
9/ 1/2009 Sloman Roy Black Letter re Epstein wanting to transfer his supervision from State of Florida to
the Virgin Islands 90
9/17/2008 Draft of letter regarding transfer of supervision to the Virgin Islands with
attorney
9/ 18/2009 Black Villafana Letter in response to transfer of supervision to the Virgin Islands (Villafafia) Letter
notes
9/29/2009 Hon. Jeffrey
Colbath
Adam Horowitz Letter that Epstein violated his No -Contact Order on 9/16/09 by coming
within 10 feet of Horowitz's client, Individual #44, Jane Doe No. 4.
10/21/2009 Villafafia Roy Black Response to 9/18/09 letter
10/29/2009 Open file and request USAO # (2009R02690, Operation Stolen Globe)
Privileged Confidential Page 49 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
12/9/2009 Villafafia Roy Black Letter in response to 11/02/09 letter re Epstein 's place of employment with
attached Complaint against Scott Rothstein and Bradley J. Edwards
1/4/2010 Villafafia Spencer Kuvin Letter re computer seized by FBI
1/20/2010 Villafalia Roy Black Letter re attorney's fees
1/21/2010 Villafatia Roy Black Email re 1/20/10 letter
2/11/2010 Roy Black Villafafia Letter in follow up to meeting held week prior
2/18/2010 Villafatia Roy Black Letter in response to 2/11/10 letter from Villafatia
3/4/2010 Roy Black and
Martin Weinberg Critton Letter on thoughts and issues concerning NPA
3/5/2010 Sloman, . Villafana , Senior Roy Black Letter renewing request for clarity as to what legal issues civil counsel can . itigated without
causing breach
of NPA
3/29/2010 Sloman,
Villafana , Senior Roy Black Letter re Motion to Dismiss
4/2/2010 Roy Black Villafafia Letter re obligation to victims
7/1/2010 7/1/2010 -7/31/2010 Epstein completed term of house arrest
9/8/2010 Administrative Order closing case
3/20/2011 Letter from Acosta re Epstein case
7/29/2011 Villafalia Lefkowitz Letter in response to 7/27/11 letter from Villafafia
8/1/2011
Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant General Counsel , Executive Office
for United States Attorneys , and Benjamin Greenberg, First Assistant U.S.
Attorney , Southern District of Florida , regarding Formal Notice of Office-
wide Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated July 28, August 3, August
24 and August 29, 2011
Privileged Confidential Page 50 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Date To From Re: Exhibit #
8/24/2011
Wilfredo Ferrer
(U.S. Attorney ,
SDFL ), Robert
O'Neill (U.S.
Attorney ,
MDFL),
Benjamin
Greenberg
(FAUSA,
SDFL ), and Lee
Bentley
(FAUSA,
MDFL)
Richard Sudder
Email regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern District of
Florida . Cc's David MSODAG), Jay Macklin (USAEO), Thomas
Anderson (USAEO), Tapken (USAEO), and James Read (USAEO)
Privileged Confidential Page 51 of 51 Contains 6(e) Material
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FGJ 07-103(WPB)
U.S. District Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks
IN RE:
GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS
SEALED ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO DISCLOSE
GRAND JURY MATERIAL
THIS MATTER has come before the Court on the United States' Sealed Application for
Permission to Disclose Grand Jury Material and for Entry of a Protective Order. The Court has
considered the Motion and finds that:
(I) the United States has shown a "particularized need" for the limited disclosure of
materials related to matters occurring before the Grand Jury ;
(2) the United States has shown that the disclosure is "in connection with a judicial
proceeding," that is, in connection with an administrative proceeding conducted by the Justice
Department 's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) arising out of a decision by United
States District Judge Kenneth A. Marra in the matter of Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2I United
States, S.D. Fla. Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra ;
(3) the materials are needed to avoid an injustice in another proceeding, that is, the
OPR administrative proceeding and any referrals to state bar authorities, other government
agencies for law enforcement purposes, courts, and grand juries in accordance with OPR's Policies
and Procedures;
(4) the need for disclosure is greater than the need for continued secrecy; and
(5) the request is structured to cover only the needed materials.
Accordingly, the United States Attorney 's Office for the Southern District of Florida ,
including Assistant United States Attorney A. Marie Villafafia, and the Justice Department 's
Office of Professional Responsibility may disclose to attorney Jonathan Biran matters occurring
before the grand jury necessary to: (a) allow AUSA Villafafia to respond to OPR's written
questions; (b) prepare for OPR's interview of AUSA Villafarla; and (c) participate fully in OPR's
interview of AUSA Villafaiia.
Disclosure shall be limited as set forth in the attached Protective Order.
To the extent that AUSA Villafafla's May 10, 2019 Response to OPR's written questions
and any drafts thereof disclosed any material that arguably referred to matters occurring before the
grand jury , this Order is entered nuns pro tune to authorize those disclosures to Mr. Biran.
This Order and the attached Protective Order shall be SEALED, except that copies may be
provided to the U.S. Attorney 's Office for the Southern District of Florida , which may provide
copies to OPR and attorney Jonathan Biran.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Done and Ordered in West Palm Beach , Fl ay of May, 2 19.
Certified Copies Furnished to:
AUSA A. Marie Villafaila
ALD M. MIDDLEBROOKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT TT 1111W
Certified to be a true and
correct copy of the document on file
Angola E. Noble, Clerk,
Distri C
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FGJ 07-103(WPB)
U.S. District Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks
IN RE:
GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS
SEALED PROTECTIVE ORDER
This matter came before the Court on the United States' Sealed Application for Permission
to Disclose Grand Jury Material and for Entry of a Protective Order. Having granted the
Application to Disclose Grand Jury Material in a separate Order, the Court hereby enters the
following Protective Order, which governs the conditions for disclosure, maintenance, and
destruction of any material containing "matters occurring before the grand jury " (hereinafter
referred to as "grand jury material").
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The government is authorized nunc pro tune to produce to attorney Jonathan Biran
of Baker Donelson grand jury material relevant to his representation of Assistant U.S. Attorney A.
Marie Villafafia that is necessary to: (a) allow AUSA Villafafia to respond to OPR's written
questions; (b) prepare for OPR's interview of AUSA Villafaila; and (c) participate fully in OPR's
interview of AUSA Villafafia.
2. The government and Mr. Biran shall make efforts to minimize the amount of grand
jury material produced to or maintained by Mr. Biran. Mr. Biran shall not be given copies of
subpoenas, documents produced in response to subpoenas, transcripts, proposed or completed
indictments, prosecution memoranda, or items prepared for use in front of the grand jury , but these
Page 1 of 2
items may be shown to Mr. Biran and discussed in preparation sessions and during interviews.
3. Any hard copies of grand jury material provided to Mr. Biran shall not be
photocopied and shall be securely maintained.
4. Any digital copies of grand jury material provided to Mr. Biran shall be encrypted.
5. Any grand jury material provided to Mr. Biran can only be reviewed by him and
not by anyone else in his firm.
6. At the conclusion of the OPR proceedings and any related proceedings wherein Mr.
Biran represents AUSA Villafaha, all grand jury material in Mr. Biran's possession shall be
destroyed. Hard copy documents must be shredded and electronic documents must be deleted
and purged.
DONE AND ORDERED this ,i li day of May,
Certified to be a true and correct copy of the document on file
Angela E. Noble, Clerk,
U S. Distr ct C
ALD M. MIDDLEBROOKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
I certify that I have read and agree to be bound by the terms of this Protective Order:
Date:
Jonathan Biran, Esq.
Baker Donelson
Page 2 of 2
STATEMENT OF A. MARIE VILLAFARA IN RESPONSE TO
APRIL 2, 2019 LETTER FROM JEFFREY It RAGSDALE
To the extent possible, I have provided all information relevant to your inquiry, including
applicable documents. Due to the passage of time, updates to various software and hardware, and
the crash of my work laptop several years ago, I no longer have every piece of relevant material
and my memory may be imperfect.' I have organized the response to conform with the April 2,
2019 letter from Jeffrey R. Ragsdale to Jonathan Biran. Please note that there were numerous oral
and written communications between others at the U.S. Attorney 's Office and the Justice
Department with counsel for Mr. Epstein . While in some cases I was told of the communications
or cc'ed on emails or letters summarizing the communications, for many conversations, meetings,
and emails, I do not have knowledge of what occurred.
Introduction
The investigation of Jeffrey Epstein and a series of co-conspirators, named "Operation
Leap Year," officially began in May 2006. In theory, it was supposed to conclude on September
24, 2007 with the signing of a "Non-Prosecution Agreement" ("NPA ").2 As will be discussed
below, the investigation presented several issues of first impression and challenges related to
obtaining evidence and securing the cooperation of witnesses . Nonetheless, I felt certain that the
agents, my co-counsel, 'it a very strong case ag three
rsonal assistants — Adriana Ross , a/k/a " and
The case was presented for federal investigation by the Palm Beach Police Department
after they felt that Jeffrey Epstein 's legal team had put inappropriate pressure on the Palm Beach
County State Attorney 's Office to file only misdemeanor charges. Allegations of misconduct had
been leveled against the local detective and the Police Chief and they reported being followed and
harassed. As described below, the defense attorneys employed the same tactics at the federal level
against myself and the FBI .
With regard to the exhibits, whenever possible, I have used copies of original documents
or "scanned" originals that were made at the time. In some cases, all that I have are the electronic
documents (i.e., the Word Perfect letter that was printed, signed, and mailed or faxed). Because
our computers no longer have Word Perfect, I have used "Quick Print" which has distorted the
formatting. If I am providing something that I know is a "draft," I note that either in the text or in
the exhibit list. The fact that something does not contain a signature does not mean that it is a
draft, it just means that it was printed from the electronic version and I no longer have (or never
had) a copy of the original. For example, I often drafted letters for the signatures of Andrew
Lourie, Jeff Sloman, and Alex Acosta . Their assistants would have maintained the signed
originals. In some cases, I would be provided with copies and sometimes I would not. I would
usually notate my electronic files with "final" to know which was the final version, or the last-
modified version.
2 For reasons set forth below, the investigation continued due to Epstein 's post-NPA
conduct.
Page 1 of 58
Once the USAO opened the file, Epstein took the same approach that had been used with
the State — at each level of review, he hired an attorney with a personal connection to the
AUSA/USAJDOJ Attorney who was conducting the review. The attorneys raised a series of
challenges to the veracity of the victims and the veracity of the state investigators, as well as quasi-
Petite-policy arguments. When those failed, more formal legal analysis and federalism policy
arguments were presented.
Throughout this process, I wanted to keep my investigation as confidential as possible. For
example, I did not see the benefit of telling Epstein 's counsel that we had uncovered additional
victims, that we had been able to corroborate victims' accounts, or the legal theories that we were
pursuing. My objections to making these disclosures were all overruled. Also, unbeknownst to
me, at least one supervisory AUSA was engaging in plea discussions with counsel for Epstein
without consulting with me, the agents, or the victims. These discussions led to the creation of the
NPA — an agreement that allowed Epstein to plead guilty to state charges in exchange for immunity
for federal prosecution by the USAO for the Southern District of Florida .
After the NPA was signed on September 24, 2007, when I attempted to notify the victims
and enforce the agreement, the attacks became more personal. Epstein 's attorneys raised the same
policy arguments — which could have been raised prior to signing the NPA — as high as the DAG's
Office, and coupled them with claims of prosecutorial misconduct. As these attacks occurred, the
USAO — U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta and later First Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeff Sloman offered
Epstein the option of simply "unwinding"3 the NPA — after all, he had never performed any part
of it. In my mind it was unfathomable that Epstein would be allowed to spend months attacking
not just the validity of our investigation and the validity of the NPA , but also making false
allegations of prosecutorial misconduct against myself and FAUSA Sloman and still be allowed
the benefit of what was, in my opinion, an unreasonably favorable agreement. Since everyone
from the U.S. Attorney down to me agreed that the case was headed for a trial, the investigation
continued, including identifying additional victims, conducting interviews, issuing grand jury
subpoenas, drafting revised indictment packages, and presenting testimony to the grand jury .
Epstein 's clear intent to go to trial was on display during this period as he deposed victims
identified only through the federal investigation in the guise of taking discovery in the state case.
On June 23, 2008, John Roth in the DAG's Office issued his letter denying Epstein 's final
appeal. While USA Acosta allowed Epstein the benefit of the NPA , Epstein still tried to avoid
several key parts of the NPA 's terms, and would have escaped them but for my insistence.
On June 30, 2008, Epstein entered his guilty plea in state court and was sentenced to 18
months' in the county jail in accordance with the terms of his state plea agreement and the NPA .
Not long thereafter, I learned that Epstein had applied for work release and the Palm Beach County
Sheriff's Office had granted the application. Prior to Epstein 's guilty plea, the issue of work
release had been specifically discussed with Epstein 's counsel and they informed us that Epstein
would not seek work release. The agents and I also met with the Sheriff's Office in advance of
the plea and had been told that Epstein would not be eligible for work release. Accordingly, I
provided my Notice of Breach, but was told by defense attorney Roy Black that, despite those
specific conversations, USA Acosta himself agreed that Epstein would be eligible for any program
3 "Unwinding" was USA Acosta 's term for mutual rescission — the USAO could file its
charges and Epstein would have no obligations to plead guilty in state or federal court.
Page 2 of 58
that the state offered, including work release. Because of this, I had to withdraw the Notice of
Breach and could only write a letter to the Sheriff's Office pointing out all of the false statements
contained in Epstein 's application for work release and letters to the victims informing them that
Epstein was in work release status. The Sheriff's Office never responded to or acknowledged my
letter.
On June 9, 2009, I prepared what I believe was the last Memorandum requesting
authorization to issue a Notice of Breach and to indict Epstein . The Office authorized issuance of
the Notice of Breach, and the Indictment Packs es was re-reviewed a roved, and signed, with
arrest warrants for Jeffrey Epstein , and The Notice of Breach
was served on June 12, 2009 at a hearing on pstein's Motion to Dismiss one of the civil suits
filed by one of the victims identified during the federal investigation. Once again, Epstein was
allowed to "cure" his breach, and we were not allowed to file the indictment.
There were strong internal disagreements on a number of subjects, including: the handling
of the meetings with Epstein 's counsel; plea negotiations; the NPA generally; the failure to consult
with the victims; continuing plea negotiations in the face of Epstein 's clear bad faith; the refusal
to defend me against personal attacks from Epstein 's attorneys; the agreement to put off seeking
Epstein 's computer equipment; the consultations with Epstein 's attorneys regarding victim
notifications; the handling of the "appeals" to Washington ; allowing delays during those "appeals,"
while Epstein 's attorneys were harassing the victims and their family members; attempts by
Epstein to renegotiate the term of imprisonment; attempts by Epstein to renegotiate the payment
of damages to the victims and attorneys' fees to their attorney representative; allowing Epstein to
participate in the work release program after specifically discussing it during plea negotiations;
and repeatedly allowing Epstein to "cure" intentional breaches of the NPA . These were kept
internal as I tried to deal professionally with opposing counsel.
In the midst of all of the post-NPA back-and-forth with Epstein , was the Jane Doel United
States litigation .° Despite the Office's request to be recused from the case, the Justice Department
decided that there was no conflict of interest and I was tasked with serving as co-counsel. The
Office asserted attorney-client, executive, work product, and deliberative process privileges, so all
of the internal disagreements, pros memos, and indictments were not disclosed while all of my
communications with opposing counsel (often at the behest of supervisors) were disclosed. After
an initial flurry of filings, Brad Edwards , as counsel for the named plaintiffs, stated on the record
that he believed that setting aside the NPA would not benefit his clients, and he sued Epstein on
behalf of a number of victims under the NPA . I did what I could to assist Mr. Edwards, other
attorneys, including Mr. Josefsberg , the attorney selected by the Special Master, and the Court, to
locate victims, provide signed copies of the NPA , and answer questions. After all of the civil suits
between Epstein and the victims were settled through the spectre of breaching the NPA , Mr.
Edwards re-initiated the Jane Doe ' United States litigation , asserting that his clients wanted to
4 A few days after Jeffrey Epstein entered his guilty plea in state court, attorney Brad
Edwards filed suit on behalf of one of the victims identified in the federal investigation (later
expanded to include a second victim who had been identified in the state investigation), alleging
violations of the Crimelictims' Rights Act. The suit, which is still pending, is captioned Jane
Doe I and Jane Doe 2 United States, 08-80736-CV-KAM.
Page 3 of 58
set aside the NPA and see Mr. Epstein federally charged due to violations of the Crime Victims'
Rights Act.
In response to your questions, I have attempted to distill the past 13 years of emails, letters,
research, pleadings, and conversations into a coherent document and attach the most relevant
items. Given the sheer volume of materials involved here and the passage of time, while I have
worked diligently to answer your questions as fully as possible, I certainly could have missed
something amongst the thousands of pages of emails, drafts, and hard copy and electronic
documents. If there are additional items or topics that need further explanation or more
documentation, I can delve further.
A. The Non-Prosecution Agreement
1. Describe the circumstances under which the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein
was referred to the USAO , including when, why, how, and by whom the
referral was made. Explain why the USAO decided to initiate a federal grand
jury investigation into this matter, including what federal interests were
perceived to be involved, and identify the individuals participating in the
decision.
Some time in early 2006, FBI Special Agent E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall approached me about
an investigation being conducted by the Town of Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD "). I do
not know how or when S/A Kuyrkendall was first contacted about the matter.
The first mentions of the investigation were just passing comments during meetings on
other matters. S/A Kuyrkendall and I were working on a number of different child exploitation
matters at the time, along with ICE Special Agent David Malone. I remember generally that S/A
Kuyrkendall mentioned an investigation of a wealthy man who lived on Palm Beach and recruited
minors for sexual activity. During these casual conversations, I do not believe that Mr. Epstein 's
name was mentioned. If it was mentioned, it held no significance for me. I recall that S/A
Kuyrkendall mentioned that PBPD had reached out to her because the Palm Beach County State
Attorney 's Office was leaning towards not charging the case at all or letting the defendant plead
to a misdemeanor charge of solicitation of prostitution . At some point I told S/A Kuyrkendall that,
if PBPD wanted to look into federal charges, I would need more information about the allegations
and I encouraged her to set up a meeting. I recall S/A Kuyrkendall telling me that PBPD wanted
to give the State Attorney 's Office the opportunity to properly charge the case before presenting it
for federal investigation and prosecution.
In May 2006, I met with S/A Kuyrkendall and PBPD Detective Joe Recarey in the 4th Floor
Conference Room at the U.S. Attorney 's Office in West Palm Beach . I do not recall whether S/A
Malone was present. Detective Recarey summarized the investigation into state criminal sexual
conduct involving Epstein and his personal assistants. Briefly, Epstein , through his personal
assistants, recruited girls and young womens — mainly from a local high school — to travel to his
residence on Palm Beach to perform erotic massages . Although they had no massage training, the
5 I use these terms deliberately. "Girls " refers to females under the age of 18 and "young
women" refers to females over the age of 18. When I refer to both groups jointly, I will use the
term "females."
Page 4 of 58
girls and young women were coached to massage Mr. Epstein in various states of undress. The
sexual activity varied and included: Mr. Epstein masturbating himself at the end of the massage ;
having the females masturbate him; Mr. Epstein fondling the females' breasts and genitalia; using
sex toys on the females; digital penetration of the females; sexual intercourse with Mr. Epstein ;
and Mr. Epstein observing while one of the girls had sex with one of his assistants. At the end of
each "massage " session, Mr. Epstein or one of his assistants would pay the female involved. If
the female involved in the massage was brought to Mr. Epstein 's residence by a "recruiter," then
the "recruiter" also would be paid.
Detective Recarey did not have any information regarding any of the females traveling
interstate or internationally to engage in sexual activity, but Det. Recarey reported that Mr. Epstein
and his assistants traveled in and out of the Palm Beach International Airport on Epstein 's private
airplane. Det. Recarey stated that flight logs he had seen sometimes referred to passengers as
"females," without names or ages, so it was possible that girls could have been on board, but Det.
Recarey had not been able to confirm that. Det. Recarey stated that a search warrant had been
executed on Mr. Epstein 's residence and evidence had been seized, including message pads
showing calls from females confirming that they would be coming to "work," which was the
euphemism used for giving a "massage " — another euphemism for engaging in sexual activity for
money . Det. Recarey also reported that it had appeared that Mr. Epstein had been "tipped oft"
about the coming search warrant because all of the computer CPUs had been removed from the
residence — the keyboards and screens were still in place, just the CPUs had been taken. Det.
Recarey also reported that some surveillance cameras were in place but they had only recovered a
limited amount of surveillance video. Det. Recarey stated that between 20 and 30 females had
been identified [NB: I believe that he told me the exact number, I just don't recall that number
now].
S/A Kuyrkendall and Det. Recarey asked me whether there were federal criminal charges
that could be pursued. I remember getting up from the conference room, walking to my office,
and getting my code book and walking back. I looked through 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422 (enticement of
minors into prostitution /illegal sexual activity) and 2423 (travel for purposes of engaging in illegal
sexual conduct).6 We talked through those statutes and the additional investigation that would be
required to prove that they had been violated, but I told them that, if the evidence was there, it was
a case that could be prosecuted federally.
Det. Recarey then told me that his boss - PBPD Chief Michael Reiter — was still pressing
the State Attorney 's Office to arrest Epstein . d p ' of probable cause
affidavits for the arrests of Jeffrey Epstein , and charging a large
number of state criminal violations. Chief Reiter ad asked the Palm Beach County State Attorney ,
Barry Krischer , to authorize the arrests and he had refused. According to Det. Recarey , pressure
had been brought to bear on SA Krischer by Epstein 's attorneys, who included Guy Fronstin and
Jack Goldberger (two personal friends of Krischer ), and Alan Dershowitz . Det. Recarey stated
that he and Chief Reiter were concerned that Epstein would be charged only with a misdemeanor
or perhaps would not be charged at all.
6 As the investigation progressed, I looked into other federal crimes, but at that first
meeting, I only remember looking at §§ 2422 and 2423.
Page 5 of 58
I recommended that we begin the process of investigating whether there was a
jurisdictional basis for federal charges, and S/A Kuyrkendall and Det. Recarey concurred. Det.
Recarey asked that Chief Reiter be given an additional opportunity to convince the State Attorney
to charge Epstein .' I explained that opening a case file and beginning a federal investigation would
not preclude the State Attorney from charging Epstein .
I then prepared the paperwork to open a file. The investigation was dubbed "Operation
Leap Year" because there were approximately 29 young women and girls who had been identified
through the State investigation.
There were several aspects of the case that involved federal interests. First, as to the
substantive crimes that Epstein was accused of committing, they involved the victimization of
minor females through the use of facilities of interstate commerce (telephones and airports); and
Epstein was traveling interstate and internationally to come to the Southern District of Florida to
commit those offenses. During the course of the investigation, I often said that, if there were a
trial, I would tell the jury that Jeffrey Epstein traveled to Florida to use Royal Palm Beach High
School as his personal brothel. Second, the removal of the computer equipment from Epstein 's
home prior to the execution of the search warrant suggested possible public corruption at the Palm
Beach County courthouse (where the search warrant application was signed) and also raised the
possibility that Epstein may have been involved in the manufacture and/or possession of child
pornography . Eradication of child pornography was a particular focus of Project Safe Childhood;
its production and storage on computer equipment involved the use of items produced in interstate
and foreign commerce; and child pornography was often distributed through facilities of interstate
and foreign commerce. Third, Det. Recarey was suggesting that political or other pressure was
being placed on an elected official (the State Attorney ) to avoid or minimize criminal exposure for
a person who committed numerous state crimes related to the exploitation of girls and young
women. Setting aside the issue of prostitution , the sexual activity involving girls under the age of
16 could be charged as sex battery in the state. Ignoring those crimes suggested possible public
corruption or, at the least, a miscarriage of justice.
With regard to the logistics of opening the case file, the opening of files in West Palm
Beach is relatively informal. In instances where an agent approaches a line AUSA directly (either
because it is a duty matter or because the investigation is within the AUSA's area of expertise),
the line AUSA will give his or her assistant the details of the case for the LIONS file-opening
paperwork and then give a brief oral explanation of the case to his/her supervisor along with the
paperwork. If the supervisor agrees that a file should be opened, he or she will normally sign the
LIONS form on the spot and hand the file back to the AUSA. In this case, I prepared a file jacket;
my assistant did the LIONS paperwork; I signed the conflict form; briefed my supervisor, Karen
Atkinson; and she signed the LIONS paperwork assigning the case to me. This all occurred either
on the day of the meeting with Detective Recarey and S/A Kuyrkendall or within a few days
thereafter. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is the file opening paperwork and file jacket showing that
the case was opened in LIONS on May 23, 2006.
I do recall that at some time relatively soon after the file was opened, I did something that
I had never done before or since. I initiated a meeting with the U.S. Attorney and the First
7 Although I did not know it at the time, on May I, 2006, Chief Reiter sent a letter to State
Attorney Krischer asking Krischer to consider recusing himself from the case. (Exhibit 1.)
Page 6 of 58
Assistant, Alex Acosta and Jeff Sloman, where I traveled to Miami and told them about the case.
I recall that I explained the case and how the PBPD believed that Epstein had used political or
other pressure to avoid serious punishment in Palm Beach County state court. That possibility
troubled me greatly; hence, my request to meet with executive management. Messrs. Acosta and
Sloman had the same reaction that I had the first time that Det. Recarey told me about Mr. Epstein
— if I have never heard of him, how much influence could this person have? I remember
specifically saying to them that I expected the case would be time and resource-intensive and I did
not want to invest the time and the FBI 's resources if the Office would just back down to pressure
at the end. Messrs. Acosta and Sloman assured me that, if there was sufficient evidence to support
the case, Mr. Epstein would be charged appropriately.8
2. Describe in detail your role, and the role of each other person in the USAO ,
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI ), and elsewhere within the
Department of Justice — collectively herein "the government" — who was
involved in the assessment of the viability and strength of the federal case
against Mr. Epstein and in the decision to negotiate a pre-indictment
resolution of the case.
My Role
I was the line AUSA assigned to the case. In conjunction with the case agents, I handled
all aspects of the grand jury investigation — deciding what subpoenas to issue; whom to interview;
whom to call to testify before the grand jury ; what lines of inquiry to pursue to support various
legal theories; I conducted legal research to support charges; I reached out to others throughout the
Department and the federal government for information on previous investigations of Mr. Epstein ,
and for legal guidance on various aspects of the case (e.g., OEO, CEOS , SEC , SDNY , and
AFMLS); along with the FBI agents and the FBI Victim-Witness Coordinator, I had direct contact
with victims via interviews, meetings, and consultations regarding safety/privacy/mental health
concerns; and I handled all court proceedings related to the investigation. When I felt that
sufficient evidence had been collected to prove Mr. Epstein 's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, I
drafted a prosecution memorandum, indictment, and related documents. I revised those documents
in response to comments from those in the supervisory chain of command and, as explained below,
after additional evidence was secured. I participated in some (but not all) of the meetings between
members of the USAO and counsel for Jeffrey Epstein . I prepared briefing materials for
management in preparation for those meetings and in response to issues raised during those
meetings.
Normally the assigned line AUSA handles plea negotiations, and I recommended that I
enter into negotiations that would result in a joint federal and state resolution (i.e., a plea to federal
8 I do not have a contemporaneous memorandum and cannot find the date of the meeting.
In a July 13, 2007 email exchange between myself and Criminal Chief Matt Menchel , I describe
the meeting as follows: "I summarized the case and the State Attorney 's Office's handling of it.
I acknowledged that we needed to do work to collect the evidence establishing a federal nexus,
and I noted the time and money that would be required for an investigation. I said that I was
willing to invest that time and the FBI was willing to invest the money , but I didn't want to get to
the end and then have the Office be intimidated by the high-powered lawyers . I was assured that
that would not happen." (See Exhibit 3.)
Page 7 of 58
charges in federal court and a plea to state charges in state court). I was reprimanded for doing so.
Thus, as will be discussed in more detail below, I played no role in the decision to enter into a
Non-Prosecution Agreement in exchange for Jeffrey Epstein 's entry of a guilty plea to a state
charge requiring a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment or Epstein 's plea to federal charges
resulting in a maximum sentence of 18 months' imprisonment (as will be explained below,
Epstein 's counsel repeatedly changed their minds about whether to take the federal route or the
state route). Although I was tasked with drafting the agreements and Information, all of the
documents were repeatedly and substantively revised by various supervisors, and I was responsible
for incorporating those edits. I also was asked to sign the Non-Prosecution Agreement.
When Epstein sought to have the Non-Prosecution Agreement set aside by "appealing" the
matter to CEOS , the AAG, and the DAG, I handled the continued investigation of Epstein ,
including working with the FBI to identify additional victims, issue additional grand jury
subpoenas, and prepare an updated indictment package. At the request of the U.S. Attorney , I also
responded to inquiries from CEOS , the AAG, and the DAG's Office and drafted submissions on
behalf of the USAO in response to arguments raised by Epstein 's attorneys.
I believe that I prepared a first draft of the Addendum to the Non-Prosecution Agreement,
but others took the laboring oar on that document. I drafted numerous victim notification letters
and responded to defense objections to those letters. I drafted the letter to the Special Master with
the USAO 's recommendations for the qualities to look for in the attorney representative for the
victims. I monitored Epstein 's compliance with the Non-Prosecution Agreement and served
several breach notices.
U.S. Attorney 's Office Personnel
AUSA Karen Atkinson (now retired): AUSA Atkinson was my direct supervisor. She
reviewed indictment packages and other court-related matters and provided guidance and
served as a "sounding board" for many of my concerns. As will be explained below, AUSA
Atkinson did not participate in many of the meetings between the USAO and Epstein 's
counsel because Epstein 's counsel "skipped her" in the chain of command, directing their
communications to MAUSA9 Andrew Lourie, Criminal Chief Matt Menchel , First
Assistant Jeff Sloman, and U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta . AUSA Atkinson did participate in
meetings with the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office about Epstein 's work release and several
conference calls with defendant attorney Roy Black and others about Epstein 's breaches of
the Non-Prosecution Agreement.
MAUSA Andrew Lourie (now in private practice): MAUSA Lourie was my second-
line supervisor and head of the West Palm Beach office. Over the objection of myself and
my co-counsel, he granted the request of Epstein 's attorneys to meet to allow Epstein 's
attorneys to argue that the USAO should decline the matter. That began the series of
meetings between all levels of the USAO and Epstein 's counsel. MAUSA Lourie reviewed
my work; asked me to conduct some specific research; and reviewed drafts of our responses
9 The Managing Assistant U.S. Attorney ("MAUSA") is the head of the West Palm Beach
Office.
Page 8 of 58
to legal arguments raised by Epstein 's counsel. MAUSA Lourie also participated in
conversations with the State Attorney , and directly participated in negotiations of the
language to be used in the Non-Prosecution Agreement, federal Plea Agreement, and
Information. He had numerous conversations with counsel for Epstein outside of my
presence when they objected to my refusal to agree with their changes. MAUSA Lourie
also communicated with the U.S. Attorney about the negotiations. He would then
communicate changes from the defense and the U.S. Attorney to me to incorporate. Later,
when Epstein 's attorneys appealed to AAG Alice Fisher , Mr. Lourie was on detail as AAG
Fisher's Chief of Staff and facilitated the meeting between Epstein 's counsel and the AAG.
AAG Fisher's written response was issued while MAUSA Lourie was still her Chief of
Staff. I do not know who drafted the written response.
Acting MAUSA Rolando Garcia (still with the USAO ): When MAUSA Lourie was on
detail with AAG Fisher's Office, Rolando Garcia was named the Acting MAUSA. He
participated in at least one meeting with Epstein 's attorneys and the State Attorney . Mr.
Garcia also was involved in some of the negotiations regarding the language of the Non-
Prosecution Agreement. He later reviewed at least one of the iterations of the indictment
package and signed the indictment that was supposed to be presented to the grand jury in
June 2009.
Criminal Chief Matthew Menchel (now in private practice): Criminal Chief Menchel
was the third line supervisor of the matter. Generally, West Palm Beach indictments are
reviewed and approved by the MAUSA and are not reviewed by Miami . However, unusual
or especially significant indictments are reviewed by the Criminal Chief. Criminal Chief
Menchel reviewed and commented on the first proposed indictment package. His
comments were incorporated into a revised indictment, and he possibly reviewed those
changes. Criminal Chief Menchel participated in numerous meetings on the case, and had
private conversations regarding resolution of the matter with Lilly Ann Sanchez , counsel
to Mr. Epstein . Ms. Sanchez had formerly served as Deputy Chief in the Major Crimes
Section at the USAO while Mr. Menchel was Chief of Major Crimes. As discussed below,
on July 26, 2007, Criminal Chief Menchel announced to the investigative team that U.S.
Attorney Acosta had decided to offer a two-year plea to Mr. Epstein . On August 3, 2007,
Mr. Menchel sent a letter to Ms. Sanchez regarding that plea offer. Mr. Menchel left the
U.S. Attorney 's Office on that date to become a partner at Kobre & Kim in New York.
First Assistant Jeffrey Sloman (now in private practice): FAUSA Sloman (later U.S.
Attorney Sloman) was involved in telephone calls and meetings with counsel for Mr.
Epstein ; when Epstein 's attorneys were dissatisfied with my proposed language for the
Non-Prosecution Agreement, victim notification letters, letters to the Special Master, etc.,
they would frequently contact FAUSA Sloman directly to complain. FAUSA Sloman
handled the bulk of the negotiations of the Addendum to the NPA . Epstein 's attorneys
later complained that FAUSA Sloman was biased because his daughter had been the victim
Page 9 of 58
of a crime. One of Epstein 's attorneys also falsely accused FAUSA Sloman (and me) of
promising money to a victim in exchange for her willingness to accuse Epstein .
U.S. Aftorney R. Alexander Acosta (now Secretary of the U.S. Department of Labor):
USA Acosta served as the head of the U.S. Attorney 's Office throughout the investigation
of Jeffrey Epstein , including the decision to enter into a Non-Prosecution Agreement,
negotiation of its terms, and attempts to enforce its terms. When Epstein 's attorneys were
dissatisfied with answers they received from me, MAUSA Lourie, and FAUSA Sloman,
they would frequently contact USA Acosta directly. USA Acosta was directly involved in
reviewing and revising the documents, including sending exact wording that he wanted
incorporated into the agreement. There were some communications between USA Acosta
and counsel for Epstein that I was not aware of at the time. For example, I did not know,
until after I had sent a breach notice, that USA Acosta agreed that Epstein could be
considered for work release. At some point after the NPA was signed, USA Acosta was
recused from the Epstein matter.
AUSA John McMillan (still at USA0): Early in the investigation, I asked AUSA
McMillan if he would serve as co-counsel on the case. Before I joined the West Palm
Beach Office, AUSA McMillan had handled the bulk of the child exploitation cases in
West Palm Beach . He and I discussed how to structure the investigation and he joined me
in opposing meeting with Epstein 's attorneys prior to the completion of the investigation.
He attended some of the meetings with Epstein 's attorneys. When the Office overruled
our positions and when it appeared that the case was not going to be charged, AUSA
McMillan decided that he should focus on other cases.
AUSA Bruce Reinhart (now U.S. Magistrate Judge): AUSA Reinhart was my office
neighbor and colleague. At one point early in the investigation (I believe before I asked
AUSA McMillan to serve as co-counsel), I sought AUSA Reinhart's counsel on strategies
for how to handle Epstein 's personal assistants — whether they should be charged or if we
should seek immunity for them. Not long thereafter, AUSA Reinhart came to me and said
that he was best friends with one of Epstein 's attorneys, Jack Goldberger , and accordingly
could not discuss the Epstein case with me any further. AUSA Reinhart left the U.S.
Attorney 's Office for private practice and later represented one of Epstein 's assistants in
the civil suits filed by Epstein 's victims.
AUSA Toni Barnes (now retired): Asset Forfeiture AUSA assigned to the Epstein case.
I had a few brief meetings with AUSA Barnes to talk about the asset forfeiture aspects of
the case. We discussed the charges under consideration and Epstein 's assets that could be
subject to forfeiture. AUSA Barnes had direct contact with the agents and the FBI 's asset
forfeiture coordinator about information/evidence that she needed to pursue forfeiture.
AUSA Barnes provided the asset forfeiture language in the proposed indictments.
Page 10 of 58
SLC Dexter Lee (still at USAO ): SLC Lee was not directly involved in the Epstein
investigation or negotiation of the NPA , but he has been lead counsel in the Jane Doe '.
United States litigation . SLC Lee had contact with USA Acosta regarding his recusal, and
with FAUSA Sloman and myself regarding self-reports to OPR about accusations of
misconduct raised by Epstein 's counsel. I also had contact with SLC Lee regarding a
Florida Bar Complaint filed by a civil attorney for some of the victims who complained
that my victim notification letters amounted to inappropriate business referrals to the
attorney selected by the Special Master.1°
Appellate SLC Anne Ruth Schultz (still at USAO ): SLC Schultz was not directly
involved in the Epstein investigation or negotiation of the NPA . It is my understanding
that USA Acosta asked SLC Schultz to check my legal analysis. I also understand that
Criminal Chief Matt Menchel contacted SLC Schultz about moving me to Appeals after I
pointed out actions that I considered to be in violation of the Ashcroft memo and victims'
rights legislation. I also understand that SLC Schultz may have knowledge of USA Acosta
providing my prosecution memorandum to Criminal Appellate Chief Patty Stemler at Main
Justice.
Shawn Ball (still at USAO ): My legal assistant during most of the Epstein investigation
and its aftermath. She assisted with preparing indictment packages, victim notification
letters, grand jury subpoenas, travel, expert witness contracts, and other items.
Cyndee Campos/Annette Castillo (both still at USAO ): Executive assistants to AUSA
Acosta and FAUSA Sloman. They compiled correspondence between the USAO and
counsel for Epstein ; scheduled meetings; and dealt with inquiries from the press and DOJ .
They may have information related to correspondence or communications between the
Executive Division and Epstein 's counsel that I am unaware of.
FBI Personnel
S/A Nesbitt Kuyrkendall (retired from FBI ): Lead case agent on Operation Leap Year.
She presented the case to the USAO , handled the bulk of the interviews, served subpoenas,
and testified before the grand jury . She communicated directly with victims and hand-
delivered the original victim notification letters. S/A Kuyrkendall also participated in
meetings with some of the senior members of the USAO and counsel for Epstein .
1° The Florida Bar determined that my victim notification letters, which are included in the
exhibits and advised the victims that they had the absolute right to select another attorney if they
so desired, were not inappropriate solicitations and did not violate the Florida Bar Rules. The
attorney who filed the complaint, Jeff Herman, later resigned from the Florida Bar due to
disciplinary action taken against him.
Page 11 of 58
S/A Jason Richards (still at FBI ): Co-case agent with S/A Kuyrkendall. Became lead
case agent during the post-guilty plea period (i.e., the interview of
responding to FOIA requests, etc.). He conducted interviews, prepared reports, analyzed
records, and communicated directly with victims. S/A Richards also participated in
meetings with some of the senior members of the USAO and counsel for Epstein .
S/A Tim Slater (still at FBI ): Co-case agent with S/A Kuyrkendall until he was
trans I e conducted interviews, including the original telephone interview
with where she asked that the FBI have no further contact with her. He
also prepared reports and analyzed records.
Group Supervisor Eliasib ("Junior") Ortiz (still at FBI ): GS Ortiz supervised S/As
Kuyrkendall, Richards, and Slater. He also participated in meetings with some of the senior
members of the USAO and counsel for Epstein .
ASAC Valerie Parlave (still at FBI ): ASAC Parlave supervised GS Ortiz. She attended
the July 26, 2007 meeting where Criminal Chief Menchel announced the two-year plea
offer.
S/A Pryor: S/A Pryor participated in the interview of in
Australia .
S/A Gavin Gumbiner (still at FBI ): S/A Gumbiner was the case agent on Operation
Stolen Globe, which involved the investigation of Alfredo Rodriguez (Jeffrey Epstein 's
butler), who tried to sell evidence to Brad Edwards .
Group Supervisor Michael Donohoe (retired from FBI ): GS Donohoe replaced GS
Ortiz as head of the violent crime group during the post-guilty plea period. He supervised
S/As Richards, Pryor, and Gumbiner.
Victim-Witness Coordinator Twiler Smith: Ms. Smith sent letters to victims, met with
them in person. and assisted in finding counseling and other services for them.
Justice Denar ment Personnel
CEOS Deputy Chief Gelber (still at DOJ ): Ms. Gelber was part of the team
that reviewed the case and the NPA when Epstein "appealed" to DOJ . Ms. Gelber also is
familiar with my work from a prior case that she and I worked on together as well as other
PSC cases where I have consulted with her.
CEOS Chief Drew Oosterbaan (now private in-house counsel): Mr. Oosterbaan
reviewed and opined on the case and the NPA when Epstein "appealed" to DOJ . He also
attended meetings in the SDFL with myself, the case agents, USAO supervisory staff, and
Page 12 of 58
counsel for Epstein . I conferred with Mr. Oosterbaan about charging, staffing, and victim-
related issues.
CEOS Trial Attorney Myesha Braden (now at a non-profit): I first had contact with
Ms. Braden when conducting research regarding some of the legal issues raised by the case
(she was the CEOS Duty Attorney on the day that I called). After AUSA McMillan left
the case, I contacted Mr. Oosterbaan about having a CEOS Trial Attorney co-chair the case
and asked if Ms. Braden was available. She participated in interviews, discussed case
strategy, and reviewed pros memos and indictments.
Criminal Appellate Chief Patty Stemler (still at DOJ ): At various times, I have heard
that USA Acosta provided my pros memo to Chief Stemler and asked her to review my
legal analysis. I have never asked Chief Stemler whether this actually occurred. SLC Anne
Schultz may know whether this occurred.
AAG Alice Fisher (now in private practice): After CEOS rejected the "appeal" from
Mr. Epstein 's attorneys, they asked for further review by AAG Fisher. She met with the
attorneys and prepared a written opinion rejecting Epstein 's arguments.
Senior Associate Deputy Attorney General John Roth (now private in-house counsel):
Following AAG Fisher's rejection, Epstein 's attorneys asked for review by the DAG. I do
not know whether Epstein 's counsel met with the DAG, but they did present arguments to
Mr. Roth, who was Chief of StafPSr. Associate Deputy Attorney General . Mr. Roth wrote
a letter rejecting Epstein 's arguments.
Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip (now in private practice): Mark Filip was the
Deputy Attorney General to whom Mr. Epstein 's arguments were addressed. As noted
above, I do not know if Mr. Filip met with Epstein 's counsel, or if the meetings were only
held with Mr. Roth.
Others Whose Counsel I Sought During the Case:
Assistant U.S. Attorney Susan Roe (still an AUSA in Seattle): AUSA Roe was not
involved in the Epstein investigation. During the pendency of the Epstein investigation,
she began investigating David Copperfield , who was a friend of Epstein , and we conferred
with each other about strategy. I informed AUSA Roe of the difficulties in convincing the
Office to prosecute Epstein .
Attorney Advisor Tammie Gregg (still at DOJ ): Ms. Gregg is a friend from my days at
Dorsey & Whitney. She joined the Justice Department before I did and we have stayed in
contact over the years. She had experience with USA Acosta when he was the head of the
Civil Rights Section at Main Justice so I turned to her for advice in handling the Epstein
situation.
Page 13 of 58
Assistant U.S. Attorney E.J. Yera (still at DO.)): Mr. Yera and I were dating at the time
of the Epstein investigation. (We are now married .) He was a more senior AUSA who
was familiar with some of Epstein 's counsel. I sought his advice on some of the issues —
legal and non-legal — that arose during the case.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Lynn Kirkpatrick (still at the USAO ): Ms. Kirkpatrick and I
are friends from my time in Miami . She was a supervisor in Miami although not in my
chain of command. I would often speak or email with her just for advice.
3. Explain fully the process and circumstances leading to the decision to resolve
the case through a non-prosecution agreement (sometimes referred to by
defense counsel and the government as a deferred prosecution agreement, but
described herein as the non-prosecution agreement). Explain why the
government initially prepared to resolve the case through a federal plea
agreement, but ultimately did not require Mr. Epstein to enter a plea in federal
court. The explanation should identify the parties involved in the decision, the
individual(s) responsible for all final decisions regarding the non-prosecution
agreement and its terms, and the basis for the decision to resolve the case
through a non-prosecution agreement.
Let me preface with some background on how I normally handle investigations and
prosecutions. When undertaking investigations, my normal practice is to meet with agents, confer
with them about an investigative plan, and work together until the case is ready for indictment. I
update my supervisors along the way, seek advice or guidance from supervisors and colleagues if
an issue is especially complex or novel, and get approval for actions as required by the USAM,
but I have always focused on learning as much as possible about the subject area, the defendant,
and the facts related to the alleged crime — I want to be the subject matter expert in the courtroom.
Then, once all of those items are completed, I prepare a comprehensive prosecution memo and
proposed indictment, which are submitted for review.
I believe strongly that investigations — especially child exploitation investigations — should
be conducted as covertly as possible in order to protect the victims' privacy; to avoid harm to the
accused's reputation if the accusation is determined to be false; and to maintain the sanctity of the
investigation. In Mr. Epstein 's case, these concerns were heightened for several reasons. First,
victims identified during the state investigation had expressed fears of Epstein and building trust
with them would require assurances that Epstein would not find out that they were talking with
federal investigators. Second, the victims were between the ages of approximately 15 and 20" --
ages when women and girls might minimize or deny sexual abuse to avoid being labeled as "sluts."
Third, Epstein had made allegations in the state case that the victims were only after money and
that investigators were only after fame. Maintaining the investigation's confidentiality would
delegitimize both of those allegations. It also would avoid interference/intimidation by Epstein
and his counsel.
" They had been 14 to 17 years old at the time of the sexual activity, but time had passed.
Page 14 of 58
My confidentiality rule extends to pm-indictment communications with defendants and
their attorneys. In cases where defendants are considered a flight risk, I generally have no contact
pre-indictment. If proven, the crimes under investigation created a statutory presumption that the
defendant was a risk of flight and a danger to the community, and Epstein had virtually unlimited
resources to flee.' 2
Our effort to maintain the confidentiality of the investigation was thwarted almost
immediately by PBPD Chief Reiter . On July 24, 2006, Chief Reiter sent letters to some of the
victims identified in the state investigation informing them that the State Attorney 's Office had
decided to proceed on a single charge of solicitation of prostitution . (Exhibit 6.) Chief Reiter
encouraged the victims to contact the State Attorney 's Office with any complaints about the
handling of the matter. Chief Reiter then felt the need to disclose that he did "not feel that justice
has been sufficiently served by the indictment that has been issued. Therefore, please know that
his [sic] matter has been referred to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to determine if violations
of federal law have occurred." (Id.). While Chief Reiter did not mention the USAO , Epstein 's
counsel certainly understood that engaging the FBI meant engaging the USAO . Chief Reiter 's
actions were published in the local newspaper. (Exhibit 7.)
Because the federal investigation had been exposed by Chief Reiter , there was no ability
to operate covertly, so we began serving subpoenas on persons and entities affiliated with Epstein .
Beginning on August 2, 2006, a number of grand jury subpoenas were issued for bank information,
information related to travel on Epstein 's airplanes, school attendance records, rental car
information, and other information that would corroborate statements made by victims (see Exhibit
A-1). A subpoena also was issued for all of the evidence collected by the PBPD (see id.). Victim
notification letters also were prepared that contained my contact information for the federal agents
to provide to the victims identified during the PBPD investigation. (Exhibits 12 & 13.) As victims
were interviewed by the federal agents, they would be provided with a copy of the notification
letter. As additional victims were identified throughout the investigation, more letters were
prepared. (Exhibits 19 & 30.) Subpoenas also were prepared for testimony and evidence from
some victims who were believed to possess physical evidence that could corroborate contact with
Epstein . (See Exhibit A-1.)
One of the subpoenaed victims was Individual #28, who is referred to as Jane Doe #2 in
the Jane Doe ' United Stales litigation . When approached for an interview, Individual #28 refused
to speak with the agents, and I remember S/A Kuyrkendall telling me that she felt that Individual
#28 had tried to run over her foot as Individual #28 drove away. Individual #28 contacted Epstein
when she received the letter and subpoena; Epstein put her in touch with his attorney, Jack
Goldberger ; and Goldberger had his friend, Jim Eisenberg, serve as Individual #28's lawyer while
Epstein paid Eisenberg's fees. Individual #28 later told Brad Edwards that someone (Epstein ,
Goldberger , or Eisenberg) told her that "the government" planned to take away her baby. I don't
know if that is true, but Eisenberg insisted that Individual #28 would not speak to us without 6001
immunity. (Exhibit 9.) Once it was granted, Individual #28 spoke of Epstein in glowing terms
12 To minimize the risk of flight, I conducted research on extradition and the FBI placed a
travel watch Epstein , but especially in light of Epstein 's ownership of an airplane capable of
intercontinental travel and his foreign residences, the investigative team considered Epstein to be
a substantial flight risk.
Page 15 of 58
and in a way contradicted by other witnesses and evidence. The hiring of Eisenberg, the insistence
on 6001 immunity — something that I had never faced before or since for a child victim — and the
false exculpatory statements — all showed me how the defense would be approaching this case.
The subpoenas and interviews apparently concerned Epstein because soon after I began
trying to set up Individual #28's testimony , Epstein hired former U.S. Attorney Guy Lewis , who
began contacting me by phone and email, asking to meet with me. I declined to meet because it is
my policy not to meet during the pendency of a child exploitation investigation. Mr. Lewis
expressed his client's willingness to cooperate with the investigation. (Exhibit 10.)
When Mr. Lewis was unable to set a meeting, Epstein hired Lilly Ann Sanchez , another
former AUSA from the Miami USAO . Ms. Sanchez began calling and emailing me in early
November 2006. (Exhibit 11). Ms. Sanchez also expressed Epstein 's interest in "cooperating"
with the investigation. I knew that feigned cooperation would be used to ask for pre-trial release,
so I tested the veracity of the offer of cooperation by asking for documents that would disprove
many of Epstein 's defenses.13 Sure enough, Ms. Sanchez objected to the requests as "overbroad."
I politely declined the request for a meeting and then delayed setting up the requested meeting so
that I would have time to complete the investigation. My co-counsel, John McMillan, and I agreed
that a meeting at this early stage offered no benefit for us and only benefitted the defense.
When Ms. Sanchez could not set a meeting with me, she skipped my immediate supervisor
and contacted MAUSA Andy Lourie whom she knew from their time together in Miami . MAUSA
Lourie told AUSA McMillan and me that he had agreed to meet with Ms. Sanchez and Gerald
Lefcourt . AUSA McMillan and I told MAUSA Lourie that we had made a conscious decision not
to meet with Epstein 's attorneys and that we were opposed to a meeting. It was the first of many
disagreements between management and the line AUSAs. MAUSA Lourie told us that we were
"non-strategic thinkers" (his words) and that the meeting would result in convincing Sanchez and
Gerald Lefcourt to bring Epstein in for an interview. It was condescending and, in our opinion,
showed a lack of understanding of sex offenders generally and a lack of knowledge of this case.
Gerald Lefcourt has represented Martha Stewart — the last thing he would do is bring his client in
to face a possible "perjury trap."
In the middle of this period, which started in November 2006 and ran through January
2007, USA Acosta and I traveled to Washington , DC at the beginning of December 2006 for the
inaugural Project Safe Childhood Conference. Although I did not attach much significance to this
at the time, in preparing this response, I began wondering whether the following event was
orchestrated by Epstein and his counsel. During one of the first presentations at the conference, I
was in a large auditorium and the speaker asked the audience a question. A man in the row in front
of me introduced himself as the State Attorney from Palm Beach County (Barry Krischer ) and
answered the question. I had never met Mr. Krischer . After the seminar ended, USA Acosta came
over and we all introduced ourselves. Mr. Krischer proceeded to deride PBPD Chief Reiter and
the victims in the Epstein case — referring to them by name and talking about how some were paid
thousands of dollars, used alcohol and drugs , and looked over 18. I tried to guide the two out of
13 For example, Epstein claimed that the massages were legitimate "medical" massages , so
I wanted to see if he was taking tax deductions for medical expenses and getting other
complementary medical treatment. Epstein also claimed that he was traveling to Florida to visit
family and to maintain Florida residency. I asked for calendars and other documentation.
Page 16 of 58
the auditorium to a more private area because I did not think it was a conversation meant for public
consumption but they would not move. As the PSC Coordinator, I had overseen the invitations
for the law enforcement representatives from the S.D. Fla., and Mr. Krischer had not been on the
list. So I now wonder whether this "random" meeting was staged by Epstein .
As you will see from the timeline (Exhibit A-1), in late January 2007, I created a file folder
entitled "Research re NPAs and 6001 immunity." (Exhibit 15.) This was not research related to
Non-Prosecution Agreements in connection with resolving the case against Epstein . In November
poenas were served on two other Epstein employees — Janusz Banasiak
Both initially asked for immunity. After speaking with Banasiak 's
attorney, r. anasi was satisfied with a standard Kastigar letter, but Ms. Mucinska's attorney
was insistent on formal immunity, and as noted above, so was Individual #28. I don't believe that,
prior to this investigation, I had ever prepared a request for 6001 immunity, so I was researching
the process.
The meeting with Ms. Sanchez and Mr. Lefcourt was set for February 1, 2007. As noted
above, despite Ms. Sanchez' statements of Epstein 's willingness to cooperate, she complained that
my document requests were "overbroad," so MAUSA Lourie and I drafted a more specific list
(Exhibit 14).14 Ms. Sanchez also asserted that Epstein had hired attorneys for all of his current
and prior employees, but refused to provide me with a list of those employees and attorneys,
wanting me to give her essentially a roadmap of my investigation. I refused (Exhibits 14 and A-
1). Instead, the agents and I continued to press forward with our investigation and I continued my
extensive legal research in preparation for the meeting with Sanchez and Lefcourt .
Although materials were supposed to be provided in advance, the "talking points" for the
meeting with Sanchez and Lefcourt did not arrive until the morning of the February 1, 2007
meeting (Exhibit 14 at 8-32). The main themes were:
1. the PBPD investigation was biased;
2. the conduct at issue was "entirely local";
3. Epstein did not know the victims were under 18;
4. none of the girls traveled in interstate commerce;
5. Epstein 's travel was not for the purposes of engaging in illegal sexual activity;
6. victim and witness credibility issues weighed against filing charges; and
7. the Petite policy precluded prosecution (id.).
While the letter covered all of these topics, I recall the meeting was focused primarily on
challenges to the victims' credibility (e.g., one victim's MySpace page showed her smoking
marijuana and posing provocatively); allegations of police overreaching; and the lack of evidence
that Epstein knew the victims were under the age of 18.
MAUSA Lourie, AUSA McMillan, and I were unpersuaded by the letter and the
presentation, but I agreed that I should carefully review transcripts of the recorded statements given
to PBPD for Brady issues." Since witness credibility was clearly at the fore, I undertook efforts
" The requested documents and items were never provided.
15 As the investigation continued and we located and identified more victims, we eventually
made a strategic decision that the initial indictment should exclude the group identified by the
Page 17 of 58
to corroborate our victim statements and to undermine Epstein 's potential defenses through
subpoenas for a wide variety of documents (see Exhibit A-1). Subpoenas also were issued to some
victims for photographs, gifts, and other records of direct or indirect contact with Epstein (see id).
Presentation of background information to the grand jury began in February 2007 (Exhibits 17,
18, and 20).
I continued to research potential charges against Epstein . Again, knowing how Epstein 's
attorneys would likely approach any trial in this matter, I wanted to prepare both a strong offense
— by including all relevant charges for jury consideration and possible plea negotiations — and a
strong defense — by including charges that would allow the admission of the widest range of
relevant evidence. With that mindset, I researched money laundering and racketeering offenses in
Chapter 95 because I knew that prostitution was a racketeering offense (see Exhibit 56). In
addition to the IRS , I conferred with an attorney at the Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering
Section in DC who opined that Epstein 's conduct could be a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1960 and 2
or another currency offense because he caused the interstate transmission of funds related to
prostitution (see Exhibit 57).16
The investigation continued at a brisk pace with Epstein 's attorneys frequently seeking
reviews from Messrs. Lourie and Menchel (see, e.g., Exhibit 58). [NB: They completely excluded
my immediate supervisor, Karen Atkinson, throughout the process.] Because of this, and because
the grand jury was very interested in the case, I tried to keep the Miami office up to date on what
was happening. There also had been little feedback from Miami to the proposed indictment that
had been provided in late April/early May. So, for example, on May 14, 2007,1 emailed Menchel
and Lourie about Epstein 's travel and asked whether I would be permitted to present the indictment
the following day or proceed by way of criminal complaint (Exhibit 26 at 1). Mr. Menchel made
clear that neither would be allowed (id.).
That Friday, May 18, 2007, I emailed Chief Menchel again, notifying him that we had
learned that the computers missing from Epstein 's home at the time of the execution of the state
search warrant were removed by a private investigator working for attorney Roy Black . After
conferring with CCIPS, the Witness Immunity Unit at OEO, and my immediate supervisor, I
planned to issue a grand jury subpoena for the equipment (id. at 2). I explained why the request
was different than a subpoena to an attorney and how I would avoid seeking privileged information
(id). I specifically asked Mr. Menchel if he had any comments or concerns but received no
response (id) 17
On Monday, May 21, 2007, I wrote to Chief Menchel and FAUSA Sloman for "guidance"
and "a sense of the direction where we are headed" (id. at 3). Again, no response. On that day,
PBPD and save them for a superseding indictment, if needed. At this point, however, the
investigation was focused mainly on the same group.
16 I mention this because my efforts to collect financial documents to support potential
money laundering charges —and also to corroborate victim statements — were later used as evidence
of my "overreaching."
17 Again, I mention this because it would later be used — by Epstein 's counsel and Chief
Menchel — as evidence of overreaching.
Page 18 of 58
having heard nothing in response to my 5/18/2007 email, I issued the subpoena to the private
investigator (Exhibit 59).
The following day, May 22, 2007, Mr. Lefcourt sent a letter to MAUSA Lourie stating:
I understand from you that in the next month or two a decision will be made by
your office whether to seek an indictment of Mr. Epstein . This will confirm that,
prior to any such decision being made, I and other attorneys on behalf of Mr.
Epstein will be given an opportunity to meet with you.
Additionally, . . . if our meeting does not resolve the matter, we would like an
opportunity to make a presentation first to Matthew Menchel , Chief of the Criminal
Division , and Jeffrey Sloman , First Assistant United States Attorney , and then,
again, if no resolution is reached, the opportunity to meet with United States
Attorney Alexander Acosta .
(Exhibit 28.)
AUSA McMillan and I were not part of the conversation where MAUSA Lourie disclosed
the timeline to Mr. Lefcourt , so I was surprised by the letter, which sought multiple opportunities
to meet with members of the Executive Division. Mr. Lourie responded, again, without meeting
with AUSA McMillan or me, stating: "I think we are on the same page . . . I did say that if you
want to meet with me again, I am ready to do so. The wording of your letter, however, suggests
implicitly that I agreed to contact you before a decision is made to seek an indictment of Mr.
Epstein . If that was your understanding, then please allow me to clarify. Our investigation is
ongoing and if we decide to seek an indictment, we don't intend to call Mr. Epstein 's
representatives to let him know that. Of course, in the interim, if you would like to make a
presentation to us, we are willing to listen. ..." (Id.).
I strenuously objected and drafted an email setting forth the reasons why (id.). I shared it
with my supervisor and she advised me not to send it. I orally advised MAUSA Lourie that I
objected to meetings, delays, and strategic disclosures in a case like this one — a child exploitation
case with a large number of victims. Nevertheless, the meeting was set for June 26, 2007. As I
predicted, the defense asked Mr. Menchel for a list of our legal theories. I told him that I did not
want to share them, and Mr. Menchel directed me to give the defense the list anyway. On June
18, 2007, I sent a letter to Gerald Lefcourt listing all the charges under investigation (Exhibit 53).
On June 14, 2007, I emailed the supervisory chain an addendum to the prosecution memo,
asked about whether they wanted me to revise the indictment, and asked what materials they
wanted prepared in advance of the June 26, 2007 meeting (Exhibit 31 at 1). I don't believe I
received any responses.
On June 21, 2007, I emailed Chief Menchel again asking who would be attending the June
26, 2007 meeting and how I could best prepare (id. at 3-4). I noted that he had been communicating
directly with Ms. Sanchez about the meeting (id.).
On June 25, 2007, Gerald Lefcourt provided written arguments for why Epstein should not
be charged federally (Exhibit 32). The following day, Alan Dershowitz , Roy Black , Gerald
Lefcourt , and Lilly Ann Sanchez presented their arguments to FAUSA Sloman and Chief Menchel .
S/A Kuyrkendall, her supervisor, and I also attended (Exhibit 5). At some point during the
Pagc 19 of 58
meeting, Chief Menchel told the defense attorneys that they needn't address the money laundering
statutes. I think he referred to them as "silly," without even having the benefit of my conversations
with IRS and AFMLS and my legal research.18 So Epstein 's counsel focused on the child
exploitation statutes. They falsely insisted that the use of the interne was needed for a 2422(b)
charge and that some sort of force, fraud , or coercion was required for a 1591 charge because 16-
and 17-year-old girls were "adults." They stated that there was no federal law prohibiting sex with
children and one would be unconstitutional.
After the meeting, MAUSA Lourie and I analyzed the materials (Exhibit 32). We both
concluded that the defense had overstated the strength of their position (id.). MAUSA Lourie felt
that the 2422(b) charges were stronger than the 2423(b) charges because we would need proof that
having a sexual massage was a motivation for Epstein 's travel (id.). My research showed that
different circuits had different standards of proof on the "purpose of travel" element (id). I never
received any feedback from Chief Menchel or FAUSA Sloman regarding Lefcourt 's written
presentation, but after the June 26, 2007 meeting, I was left with the impression that we were
continuing towards indictment.
On July 3, 2007, at 6:26 a.m., I sent an email to Jeff Sloman, Matt Menchel , and Andy
Lourie advising them about calls I had received from Lilly Ann Sanchez seeking to delay subpoena
responses and their plans to present our Office with additional analysis as well as their planned
resolution with the State Attorney 's Office (Exhibit 3). I informed everyone of my proposed
response regarding the subpoenas and that I intended to invite Lilly Ann Sanchez to call me to
discuss a resolution of the federal investigation that could include concurrent time, i.e., a plea to a
federal charge with a recommendation that the federal sentence would run concurrently with the
state sentence (See id.) I asked whether anyone had had different conversations with any attorneys
for Epstein so that there would not be any miscommunication.
Later that afternoon, Matt Menchel sent me an email (using Jeff Sloman's Blackberry) that
read, "I told Lily that a state plea with jail time and sex offender status may satisfy the usa. It was
a non-starter for them Matt". (Id.) Because I was in trial, I did not see Mr. Menchel 's email, so
my proposed email to Ms. Sanchez went out on July 4's at 4:07p.m. (Id) After my email to Ms.
Sanchez went out, I saw Mr. Menchel 's email, and I responded with a vehement objection, telling
him that I believed his plea offer was "completely unacceptable to the FBI , ICE, the victims, and
me [and that these] plea negotiations violate the Ashcroft memo, the U.S. Attorney 's Manual, and
all of the various iterations of the victims' rights legislation." (Id) I asked for the opportunity to
make a presentation addressing the strengths of the case and the points raised by Epstein 's
attorneys — I felt that it was unfair that Epstein had been given numerous opportunities to meet
with the management of the USAO and the victims had never had a similar chance (Id)
Mr. Menchel responded by reprimanding me, stating, "[a]s you well know, the US Attorney
has not even decided whether to go forward with a prosecution in this matter, thus you should have
respected his position before engaging in plea negotiations." (Id) I had not engaged in any plea
negotiations, Mr. Menchel had. Mr. Menchel also wrote, directly contrary to what USA Acosta
and FAUSA Sloman told me at the initial meeting in Miami , "it was made clear to you by the US
Attorney and the First Assistant from the time when you were first authorized to investigate Mr.
Epstein that the office had concerns about taking this case because of petit [sic] policy and a
18 Epstein 's lawyers seized on this later.
Page 20 of 58
number of legal issues. Despite being told these things, you prepared a pros memo and indictment
that included a definitive date for indictment." (Id.) Mr. Menchel also told me that my arguments
that he had violated the Ashcroft memo, the USAM and other policies were not well taken because,
as "Chief of the Criminal Division , I am the person designated by the US Attorney to exercise
appropriate discretion in deciding whether certain pleas are appropriate and consistent with the
Ashcroft memo and the USAM — not you." (Id.) Mr. Menchel also told me that I could not dictate
a meeting. (Id.)
On July 6, 2007, Gerald Lefcourt sent another letter further explaining why Epstein should
not be charged with violations of § 2422(b) (Exhibit 33). Most of the letter raised policy arguments
and the letter ended by expounding on Mr. Epstein 's good works (id.).
On July 13, 2007, after I finished my trial, I responded to Mr. Menchel 's reprimand, noting
my frustration over the Office's failure to provide me with any guidance on its position on the
matter.19 I pointed out that I had handled this case the same as I had handled all of my other cases,
by working with the agents to gather evidence and preparing an indictment package that
established not just probable cause but proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I re-iterated that I was
"asking to have the same courtesy that was extended to the defense attorneys extended to the FBI
and an Assistant in the Office. ... [And,] my first and only concern in this case . . . is the victims.
If our personality differences threaten their access to justice, then please put someone on the case
whom you trust more, and who will also protect their rights." (Id.) Mr. Menchel never responded;
nor did he allow me to make my requested presentation to USA Acosta . I do not know whether
he shared my request with FAUSA Sloman or USA Acosta .
Also on July 13, 2007, I received a letter from Roy Black complaining about the grand jury
subpoena seeking Epstein 's computer equipment (Exhibit 34). I shared the letter with MAUSA
Lourie (his handwritten notes appear on the Exhibit) and together we drafted a letter in response
(Exhibit 32 at 4). On July 16, 2007, Lilly Ann Sanchez sent my letter to Mr. Lourie, writing that
"Gerald Lefcourt and I would like to speak to you further regarding [my letter] since we do not
believe that Marie's letter was responsive to the issues raised by Roy Black ." (Exhibit 32 at 1).
Mr. Lourie and I had a conference call with Ms. Sanchez and Mr. Lefcourt and informed them that
they would have to file a motion to quash the subpoena. We then advised Mr. Menchel of the
history (Exhibit 62).
On July 19, 2007, I sent an email to MAUSA Lourie and Chief Menchel asking for
permission to serve target letters on three of Epstein 's personal assistants and for guidance on
language to be used in the target letters (Exhibit 63). Mr. Menchel responded that he was out of
the District "but let's hold off on these until we decide what course of action we are going to take
on epstein which should happen next week" (id.).
19 For example, on May 21, 2007, I wrote to Chief Menchel and FAUSA Sloman: "I have
time set aside with the grand jury tomorrow, and I am wondering if you have a sense of the
direction where we are headed — i.e., approval of an indictment something like the current draft, a
complaint to allow for pre-indictment negotiations, an indictment drastically different from the
current draft? I am concerned about confusing the grand jury , which is never a good thing. Any
guidance?" (Exhibit 54). I did not receive a response.
Page 21 of 58
After these exchanges and being reprimanded by Criminal Chief Menchel for raising those
objections, I was not consulted again about a pre-indictment plea. On July 26, 2007, agents and
supervisory personnel from the FBI and I traveled to a scheduled meeting with Chief Menchel in
Miami . That morning, before departing for Miami , I sent an email to Mr. Menchel and MAUSA
Lotuie that read, "in advance of our meeting this afternoon, I wanted to let you know my thoughts
about some of the recommended changes [to the indictment] that we had discussed the last time I
was in Miami . . ." (Exhibit 64). The FBI agents, their supervisor, their ASAIC, and I met with
Mr. Menchel . Criminal Chief Menchel entered the meeting and announced to us that "Alex
[Acosta ] has decided to offer a two-year state plea." We were not asked our opinions and the
meeting ended soon thereafter (see Exhibit 5). I remember feeling stunned. I don't remember
saying anything at the meeting.
In an attempt to provide some benefits to the victims and protections to the public, I asked
that two terms be added to this two-year deal: (1) that the victims be provided compensation via
18 U.S.C. § 2255 as a substitute for restitution because Epstein was pleading to state charges; and
(2) that Epstein be required to plead guilty to an offense requiring sex offender registration. The
Office agreed to add these two terms. On July 31, 2007, I finalized a term sheet, entitled
"CONFIDENTIAL PLEA NEGOTIATIONS: TERMS OF EPSTEIN NON-PROSECUTION
AGREEMENT." (Exhibit 4.) On the same date, it was provided to counsel for Epstein . Present
at the meeting for the government were FAUSA Jeff Sloman, Criminal Chief Matt Menchel ,
MAUSA Andy Lourie, S/A Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, S/A Jason Richards, and myself, and for Epstein
were Roy Black , Gerald Lefcourt , and Lilly Ann Sanchez . (See Exhibit 5.) At the meeting, counsel
for Epstein stated that their client would not consider a plea that required state jail time. During
the meeting, Matt Menchel suggested a plea to a federal charge that would allow Epstein the
opportunity to serve his sentence in a federal facility.
I was told that USA Acosta did not want to do a federal plea that bound the court to a two-
year prison term, so I would have to find a charge or charges that resulted in a two-year statutory
maximum. On August 1, 2007, Mr. Menchel advised that the counter-offer that Epstein 's attorneys
had promised did not arrive, and I told him that I had found a federal charge that could result in a
2-1/2 year statutory maximum (Exhibit 65).
On August 2, 2007, Lilly Ann Sanchez sent a counter-proposal directly to Criminal Chief
Matt Menchel and, in her email, stated that a copy would also be hand-delivered to USA Acosta
(Exhibit 8.) The counter-proposal essentially called for home confinement, no sex offender
registration, and an agreement to pay damages via 18 U.S.C. § 2255 (Exhibit 40). Ms. Sanchez
also asked for a meeting with the U.S. Attorney (id.).
On August 3, 2007, Mr. Menchel sent a letter rejecting the counter-proposal, advising that
a minimum of two years' imprisonment was needed to vindicate the federal interest, and that USA
Acosta was not inclined to have a meeting (Exhibit 41). Mr. Menchel provided a deadline for
August 17, 2007 to accept the plea offer (id). That was Mr. Menchel 's last day of employment
with the USAO before he entered private practice in New York.
Mr. Epstein 's attorneys were incensed that USA Acosta had set a deadline of August 17,
2007 and would not meet with them, so they demanded a meeting with CEOS Chief Drew
Oosterbaan (Exhibit 43). Mr. Oosterbaan agreed to travel to Florida to meet with USA Acosta and
Epstein 's attorneys (id.). Mr. Oosterbaan also traveled to West Palm Beach to meet with the agents
and myself to go through the evidence and our analysis of the statutes (Exhibit 5). Before he came
Page 22 of 58
to West Palm Beach , I advised Mr. Oosterbaan that I had worked with CEOS Trial Attorney
Myesha Braden on some of the legal issues and that, if there were a trial, I was hoping she might
be able to assist (Exhibit 43).
In preparation for the planned meeting on September 7, 2007, FAUSA Sloman emailed me
to ask what the status of the plea negotiations were. I wrote:
Here is the term sheet and guidelines calculation that we provided at the last
meeting. You and Matt and I had also discussed a possible federal plea to an
Information charging a 371 conspiracy, with a Rule 11 plea with a two-year cap,
but I think Matt must have asked Alex about it and it was nixed. Just to be prepared
for tomorrow, I was just starting to draft a Rule 11 Plea agreement in case Alex
changes his mind and a formal non-prosecution agreement containing the state plea
terms. . . . There are three concerns that I hope we can address tomorrow. . . .
[including] that the agents and I have not reached out to the victims to get their
approval, which as Drew politely reminded me, is required under the law.
(Exhibit 44).
On September 7, 2007, USA Acosta , FAUSA Sloman, CEOS Chief Oosterbaan, AUSA
McMillan, and I met with Kenneth Starr , Jay Lefkowitz , and Lilly Ann Sanchez (Exhibit 5). At
the meeting, Mr. Starr focused primarily on federalism/policy arguments, and Mr. Epstein 's
background. I remember Mr. Starr thanking me for bringing § 2255 to their attention and that it
would allow a state resolution that still provided the equivalent of federal restitution.
Following the meeting, there were communications between Gerald Lefcourt , USA
Acosta , and MAUSA Lourie that I was not privy to. The fact of the conversations was mentioned
in later emails. Based upon those communications, on September 10, 2007, I was asked to send
Mr. Lefcourt an office response to Lefcourt 's counterproposal (see Exhibit 47 ("Gerry: As per
your discussion with U.S. Attorney Acosta , I have attached the Office's written
counterproposal.")). I sent Mr. Lefcourt a Non-Prosecution Agreement that required Epstein , inter
alia, to:
(1) plead guilty to three state felony offenses, including lewd and lascivious battery on a
child; solicitation of minors to engage in prostitution ; and engaging in sexual activity
with minors at least sixteen years of age;
(2) make a binding recommendation (with the State Attorney 's Office) for the Court to
impose a thirty-month sentence consisting of 20 months in prison followed by 10
months of community control;
(3) waive his right to appeal his conviction and sentence;
(4) concede that victims identified by the United States were victims for purposes of 18
U.S.C. § 2255; and
(5) plead guilty by September 28, 2007 and be sentenced by October 15, 2007.
(Exhibit 66).
The following day, FAUSA Sloman forwarded to me USA Acosta 's email with USA
Acosta 's revisions to the NPA (Exhibit 46). At FAUSA Sloman's request, I incorporated the
changes and sent the new version to Mr. Lefcourt (Exhibits 47 and 67). On September 12, 2007,
MAUSA Lourie, Rolando Garcia, and I met at the State Attorney 's Office with State Attorney
Page 23 of 58
Krischer , ASA Belohlavek , Jay Lefkowitz , Gerry Lefcourt , and Jack Goldberger (Exhibit 5). The
purpose of the meeting was to finalize and coordinate the terms of the state and federal agreements.
Mr. Lefkowitz still expressed some interest in having Epstein serve his time in a federal facility,
rather than a state one, and I remember Mr. Goldberger saying that because Mr. Epstein 's home
was on Palm Beach Island and touching the Intracoastal Waterway, it was somehow in
"international waters" and federal jurisdiction. Other items that were discussed were: (1) that the
state crime that Epstein agreed to plead guilty to was one requiring sex offender registration; and
(2) that Epstein would be incarcerated 24-7 during the 20-month period of imprisonment. We left
the meeting with an understanding that Epstein 's counsel would contact us about whether Epstein
wanted to plead to federal charges pursuant to a plea agreement or proceed with the Non-
Prosecution Agreement. With that in mind, on September 13, 2007, I sent an email to USA Acosta ,
FAUSA Sloman, MAUSA Lourie, Rolando Garcia, and Karen Atkinson advising them that I had
researched three potential federal charges that could be used for Epstein , but they would all result
in a 24-month maximum. If Epstein 's counsel rejected those charges because of the 24-month
exposure, I recommended reconsidering a binding Rule 11 plea "rather than try to create violations
out of whole cloth" (Exhibit 46 at 19). I provided a proposed plea agreement and information
containing two counts of violations of 18 U.S.C. § 403.
Mr. Lourie wrote to me later on September 13, 2007, "He is going to give us an assault on
the plane or we can do conspiracy"20 (Exhibit 46 at 21). I responded, "It would still have to be a
conspiracy to commit an assault on a plane. I just want to make sure that we have something that
is factually accurate. Just trying to plan ahead" (id). At Jay Lefkowitz 's request, MAUSA Lourie
and I scheduled a conference call with him for early on the morning of September 14, 2007 (id. at
25). Mr. Lourie did not attend the conference call, and on the call, Jay Lefkowitz asked me to
consider allowing Epstein to plead to charges that required only 12 months' imprisonment. I
recommended 24 months' imprisonment. Lefkowitz said his client would plead to obstruction of
a witness and one count of assault on an airplane (id. at 29). Despite Mr. Lourie's earlier agreement
to the assault on an airplane charge, he then decided that the "assault sounds like a stretch and
factually sort of silly" (id. at 31).
I then went back to Mr. Lefkowitz with four options: (1) a plea only to state charges with
18 months' imprisonment; (2) federal and state pleas with a recommendation for concurrent time
so that Epstein could serve his time in a federal facility; (3) a § 371 plea with a binding
recommendation of 20 months' imprisonment (if USA Acosta approved it); or (4) an agreement
that had a plea to one federal charge followed by one state charge (id. at 33). We continued to
negotiate issues about how to provide restitution to the victims, and each iteration of the
agreements seemed to move us further apart. As shown in Exhibit 46, each time Mr. Lefkowitz
tried to reduce the period of incarceration; he tried to replace the state charge with one that did not
require sex offender registration; and he kept changing the damages/restitution provisions to make
it more difficult for the victims to obtain compensation; he removed the appeal waiver; he included
an agreement that we would recommend an incorrect calculation of the guidelines. It was simply
bad faith negotiations. I would point out how terms that were specifically rejected were re-
inserted, and the Office would just send me back to the table.
2° This somehow resulted in 18 months' imprisonment. I do not recall how the prison term
was decreased from 20 months on September 11, 2007 to 18 months on September 13, 2007.
Page 24 of 58
The agreement was finally completed and signed on September 24, 2007.
4. Explain fully the process and circumstances leading to the development of the
following terms of the non-prosecution agreement:
a. an 18-month period of incarceration in a state facility, including the
basis for the determination that it sufficiently satisfied the federal
interest in the case;
As noted above, the only information that I received was from Mr. Menchel 's
announcement that USA Acosta had decided to offer a two-year state deal. I do not know how
Messrs. Menchel and Acosta determined that two years' incarceration sufficiently satisfied the
federal interest in the case. During one meeting, Epstein 's attorneys raised the possibility of a
state-court plea with home confinement. USA Acosta specifically rejected the suggestion, noting
that confinement in Mr. Epstein 's home was not equivalent to incarceration. As discussed above,
the 24-month term was reduced to 20 months and then, finally, to 18 months.
b. victim restitution, including why and how to address victims' rights
through 18 U.S.C. § 2255;
The federal crimes that were under investigation all called for mandatory or discretionary
restitution under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3663 and 3663A.2' Gelber and Drew Oosterbaan from
CEOS are experts in this area, but as PSC Coordinator, ew that restitution in child exploitation
cases was a hot-button issue at the time.
The District of Alaska USAO had a multi-victim child exploitation case with a wealthy
defendant (Boehm) where they had set up a trust fund with a bank and a trustee . With Drew
Oosterbaan's help, I explored setting up a similar situation in the Epstein case (Exhibit 48), in
connection with using a guardian ad litem ("GAL") for the victims,22 if there had been a plea to
federal charges. In cases like the Epstein cases, using a GAL seemed the most prudent course
because, to the extent that the victims' interests ever diverged from the government's, the GAL
could advocate on behalf of the victims. Thus, there are several emails between myself and Jay
Lefkowitz about the appointment of a GAL and the possibility of a restitution trust fund similar to
the Boehm case out of Alaska . I obtained the trust fund agreement and spoke with the AUSA in
21 Mandatory restitution under § 3663A requires a conviction for a "crime of violence, as
defined in [18 U.S.C. §1 16." At the time, these cases would have been considered crimes of
violence because sex trafficking , even via fraud or coercion , would likely be considered to
"involve() a substantial risk that physical force against the person . . . or another may be used in
tthe course of committing the offense." 18 U.S.C. § 16(b). Post-Johnson v. United Sta , U.S.
135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), a court might decide differently. See, e.g., Menendez Whitaker,
908 F.3d 467 (9'b Cir. 2018). Even if not a crime of violence, a Court has the author; to impose
an order of restitution when sentencing a defendant convicted of any offense under title 18 for any
losses sustained by a victim as a result of the offense. 18 U.S.C. § 3663(aX1)(A), (B)(i)(I). And
the court also can order restitution to persons other than the victim of the charged offense if the
parties so agree. 18 U.S.C. § 3663(a)(1)(A).
22 I had been the first prosecutor in the S.D. Fla. to apply to the court for guardians ad litem
for victims in child exploitation cases, so I was familiar with the procedure.
Page 25 of 58
Alaska . The trust fund agreement was very complex and required a bank to agree to serve as the
holder of the corpus and a trustee to oversee the administration of the trust, as well as the Court to
enter an order setting up the trust and a mechanism for resolving disputes amongst beneficiaries
or between a beneficiary and the trustee .
In light of the amount of details and the number of victims involved, and the simple fact
that, if there was only a state plea, there would be no federal judge to undertake the process, I knew
that there was no way to accomplish a trust fund like Boehm within the confines of the NPA . In
the Boehm case, there was a much smaller number of victims and, if I remember correctly, the
victims were younger. The Alaska AUSA was able to confer with Boehm's victims and obtain
their consent to the trust agreement procedure in advance of entering into the plea agreement. The
Alaska AUSA also obtained the defendant's agreement to proceed ex pane. Our situation was
quite different. There were more victims with disparate interests. In my emails, I made it clear
that I could not bind the victims to such a procedure because I did not represent them. For example,
how would the USAO decide on the size of the corpus of the trust? Would the USAO hire expert
psychologists to evaluate the victims and economists to quantify their losses? If the USAO picked
a number, would that preclude a victim from bringing a state tort claim? Would every victim
receive the same amount? This is not how criminal restitution works — normally after a guilty
plea, the Court's Probation Office works with victims to calculate losses, and issues are litigated
at sentencing or within 90 days after sentencing. Lefkowitz was asking the USAO to pick a number
virtually out of thin air to use as the corpus of the trust for a group of victims who were not clients
of the USAO . We also would have to locate an independent bank to serve as the hold of the corpus.
Given how difficult negotiating simple plea terms had been, I believed that creating an agreement
of this sort was legally and logistically impossible.
When Epstein 's attorneys approached USA Acosta in December 2007 and suggested that
I rejected the Trust proposal for nefarious reasons, I outlined all of the concerns that I had
previously expressed to Mr. Lefkowitz (Exhibit 55).
Once I was instructed that Epstein would be allowed to plead to state charges, I wanted to
do what I could to place the victims and the community in the same position where they would
have been in Epstein had pled to a federal offense. If Epstein had pled to one of the federal offenses
under investigation, he would have been required to register as a sex offender and pay restitution
to all victims of the federal offense. With regard to the restitution piece, I knew that the state
investigation had not included all of the girls and young women whom we had identified and I was
concerned that Epstein would avoid his restitution obligations if not forced to pay.23
As part of my duties as PSC Coordinator, on September 26, 2006, I had prepared a memo
to management summarizing the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (the
"Adam Walsh Act") (Exhibit 16). One of the provisions of the Adam Walsh Act that I noted was
an amendment to 18 U.S.C. § 2255: "Section 2255 has been expanded to allow a person who,
while a minor, was a victim of various child exploitation offenses, to pursue a civil action for
personal injury damages — regardless of when the personal injury occurred. It also raises the
presumptive damage amount to $150,000. " (Id. at 7.) Although this was an amendment, I was
unaware of § 2255 prior to preparing this September 2006 memo. The first few times I brought it
23 In fact, the State Attorney 's Office did not seek or obtain restitution for any victims in
the state case, not even the two victims that were the basis of the state charges.
Page 26 of 58
to the attention of others, they thought I was mis-citing 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and I had to explain that
there actually was an 18 U.S.C. § 2255, which was a civil provision within the criminal code.
I do not know when I first discussed the possibility of using § 2255 as a replacement for
the victims' lost restitution benefits, but I know that I conducted research on § 2255 cases on July
27, 2007 (Exhibit 37). That was the day after the meeting where Criminal Chief Menchel had
announced that USA Acosta had decided to offer Epstein a two-year state plea (Exhibit 5).
Language regarding § 2255 was included in the plea agreement term sheet provided to
Epstein 's counsel on July 31, 2007 (Exhibit 38). The issue must have been raised in advance of
the meeting, because that was the first meeting attended by Ken Starr , and he specifically thanked
me for bringing § 2255 to their attention. On August 2, 2007, Lilly Ann Sanchez sent a letter to
Criminal Chief Menchel making a series of counterproposals including: "Application of 18 U.S.C.
§ 2255" (Exhibit 40 at 2). Ms. Sanchez went on to explain:
18 U.S.C. 2255 provides that any minor who suffers injury as a result of the
commission of certain offenses shall recover actual damages and the cost of any
suit. It is important to note that Mr. Epstein is prepared to fully fund the identified
group of victims which are the focus of the Office — that is, the 12 individuals noted
at the meeting on July 31, 2007. This would allow the victims to be able to
promptly put this behind them and go forward with their lives. If given the
opportunity to opine as to the appropriateness of Mr. Epstein 's proposal, in my
extensive experience in these types of cases, the victims prefer a quick resolution
with compensation for damages and will always support any disposition that
eliminates the need for trial (id. at n.1).
Thus, the use of § 2255 as a replacement for restitution was not controversial — it was
promoted by Epstein 's own attorneys, including Mr. Starr . At one point during negotiations, Mr.
Lefkowitz started advocating for a trust fluid like the one used in Boehm, mostly, I believe, to try
to place a cap on his damages exposure. I offered some potential solutions, including asking the
federal court to appoint a guardian ad litem who could work with Epstein 's counsel to see if the
victims would be willing to agree to a Trust Fund, and I would facilitate those efforts, but I simply
would not agree to something that I legally could not promise — a binding resolution for victims
whom I did not represent.
Eventually, Mr. Lefkowitz made some changes to the § 2255 language but it remained
quite close to the original proposal contained in the July 31, 2007 term sheet.
c. immunity for co-conspirators, including unidentified co-conspirators;
and
In looking through the drafts of the agreements, the immunity provision does not appear in
any of the federal plea agreements that I drafted. Its first appearance is in a version of the NPA
proposed by Jay Lefkowitz along with a proposed promise that the government would not seek
immigration sanctions against any of the co-conspirators. It was initially rejected, and then after
several iterations, Lefkowitz revised it to the language that appeared in the final NPA .
The final language was: "In consideration of Epstein 's agreement to plead guilty and to
provide compensation in the manner described above, if Epstein successfully fulfills all of the
terms and conditions of this agreement, the United States also agrees that it will not institute any
Page 27 of 58
ges against an co
,
em, including but not limited to
Adriana Ross , or " (Exhibit 52 at 5). To the extent
that there was a "criminal organization," the Office and the investigators considered Epstein to be
the head of that organization. He was certainly the most culpable individual, and we did not
foresee any scenario where we would defer prosecution against Epstein but proceed to prosecute
his subordinates. Also, while the agreement included the language "including but not limited to,"
at the time that the NPA was signed, with the possible exception of Ghislaine Maxwell , the
investigation had not disclosed any co-conspirators other than those listed.
I recall that there was extensive discussion of Lefkowitz 's proposed immigration language,
but I do not recall much discussion of this language for the reasons stated above.
d. the October 2007 addendum, including its purpose.
During the negotiation of the NPA , I had been admitted to the hospital for surgery . After
the surgery , I returned to the office almost immediately to try to complete the negotiations. When
the NPA was signed, I sought permission to take a leave of absence to address my health concerns.
While I was away, the Addendum was negotiated. While I conducted some of the drafting, I
believe that FAUSA Sloman handled the bulk of the negotiations and drafting.
My understanding was that the USAO wanted to formally assign its right to select the
attorney representative for the victims to a Special Master. The NPA stated that the USAO would
select the attorney representative in consultation with and subject to the good faith approval of
Epstein 's counsel. I had provided Epstein 's counsel with a list of attorneys, none of whom I had
ever met, that I had culled from consulting with one of the district judges24 and some AUSAs,
including Mr. Yen, who I was dating at the time. After getting that list of names, I did my own
research to determine who would be good fits for the type of litigation that I expected they would
face — both in terms of the tactics of Epstein 's lawyers and the special challenges of dealing with
emotionally fragile victims. I provided that culled list to Jay Lefkowitz and disclosed that,
although I had no financial interest, the list included a friend of a good friend of mine (I did not
describe Mr. Yera as my "boyfriend"). Even with that disclosure, Mr. Lefkowitz selected Mr.
Yera's friend. Before the matter went any further, FAUSA Sloman decided that the Office should
use a Special Master to make the selection, rather than pick anyone — even a panel of attorneys
leaving the final selection to Epstein 's counsel. Despite that, Mr. Lefkowitz and Guy Lewis — who
knew both Mr. Yera and his friend — claimed that there was a financial interest and that I had tried
to create the procedure for financial gain.25
24 Epstein 's lawyers suggested that I had ex parte communications with a judge. I simply
asked for recommendations from a judge that I was friendly with; I did not disclose anything about
the background of the case.
25 Mr. Lewis knew that Mr. Yera also was an AUSA and, therefore, was not partners with
another lawyer . When that was patently obvious, Epstein 's lawyers falsely claimed that they were
"law school roommates." Both had graduated from law school more than fifteen years before, and
had not been roommates. Ironically, one of the reasons why Epstein 's legal team approved the
selection of Robert Josefsberg was that Josefsberg and Alan Dershowitz were law school
classmates — somehow there was no "financial interest" attributed to them.
Page 28 of 58
Rather than simply elect to use a Special Master to exercise its right to make the attorney
representative selection, the USA() believed that it should formalize the assignment in writing.
5. To the extent not evidenced in e-mails or other correspondence, identify and
describe all interactions with defense counsel — such as phone conversations,
meetings, or communications by private e-mail — that you or any other
member of the government had regarding the investigation, potential
prosecution, or negotiation of a resolution of this case. If at any point you
became concerned about the nature of any member of the government's
interaction with defense counsel, describe the interaction and explain when
and why you became concerned.
My communications with opposing counsel occurred primarily via email. Most of those
communications were via office email, and some were from my home email. All of my home
emails were collected and produced as part of the Jane Doe litigation . Negotiations were occurring
at nights, on weekend, and while I was recuperating from surgery , and this occurred during a time
when out of office access to email was very limited. I believe that only supervisors had Blackberry
devices at that time.
The meetings that I attended are catalogued on the meeting timeline (Exhibit 5). I believe
there was one other meeting soon after Epstein entered his guilty plea, when I went to Jack
Goldberger 's office and met with him and Mike Tein (Guy Lewis ' law partner ) about the victim
list . Other than that, I do not recall any in-person meetings.
I had a couple of telephone conversations with Lilly Ann Sanchez and Guy Lewis at the
start of the investigation that were very brief. Jeff Sloman and/or Andy Lourie was on some of
these. I had telephone conversations later during the investigation with Lilly Ann Sanchez , Gerry
Lefcourt , Roy Black , and Nate Dershowitz about subpoena responses. Karen Atkinson and Andy
Lourie were on some of those calls. I had telephone conversations with Jay Lefkowitz about plea
negotiations and scheduling meetings. Andy Lourie, Rolando Garcia, and Jeff Sloman were on
some of those calls. I had numerous calls with Roy Black and Jack Goldberger about breaches of
the NPA . Karen Atkinson was on most of those telephone calls.
From emails and conversations, I know that Messrs. Acosta , Sloman, Menchel , and Lourie
had numerous emails and conversations (mostly via telephone and possibly some in person) with
members of the defense team. USA Acosta had contact with Ken Starr , Jay Lefkowitz , Gerry
Lefcourt , and Alan Dershowitz . FAUSA Sloman had contact with Alan Dershowitz , Gerry
Lefcourt , and Lilly Ann Sanchez . Criminal Chief Menchel had contact with Lilly Ann Sanchez
and Gerry Lefcourt . There may have been other meetings that I was unaware of. I was concerned
about the level of contact and the lack of consideration of the sanctity of the investigation. It was
imperative to keep the investigation confidential to protect not just the victims' privacy rights, but
to keep them from the harassment of overly aggressive lawyers . I felt that there were leaks of
case-related facts and strategy, as well as personal matters that undermined my ability to deal with
the defense and that ultimately was used by the defense to defame me and Mr. Sloman with senior
members of the Department of Justice .
Page 29 of 58
6. Provide a detailed description of all settlement negotiations conducted in this
matter in which you took part or of which you were otherwise aware, including
all terms of settlement that were discussed, considered, and rejected during
the negotiations. Identify all individuals who participated in those
negotiations, including government personnel and defense counsel. In each
case, identify all participants and describe the discussions that occurred.
Please see my response to Question A.3.
7. Describe the interactions by you, or anyone else within the USAO , with any
employees of the Palm Beach County State Attorney 's Office concerning the
federal or state investigation of Mr. Epstein , the terms of a proposed resolution
of the case, and the terms of the federal non-prosecution agreement, including
the terms of Mr. Epstein 's incarceration.
As noted above, my first interaction with anyone from the Palm Beach County State
Attorney 's Office about the Epstein case was at the Project Safe Childhood Conference in
Washington , DC, when State Attorney Barry Krischer introduced himself to USA Acosta and me
and started railing against the victims and the case.
My next interaction was with ASA Lanna Belohlavek at some later date. I was in her
office, I believe on another matter, and I mentioned the case. She said that she "hated" the case
and that she "hated" prostitution cases. She stated that some of the girls were not really victims
because they had been paid "thousands of dollars." I was a bit taken aback because Ms. Belohlavek
was the supervisor of the division charged with prosecuting child sex offenses, including child
prostitution cases and, by definition, child prostitutes receive money .
Although not personal interactions, I also had collected and reviewed the state grand jury
transcript, indictment, and the state investigative materials. I had conferred with former ASAs
about the use of the grand jury in the case, which was very unusual. In Florida , only capital cases
need to be presented to a grand jury — all other cases can proceed by Information — and one ASA
in Palm Beach County handles the presentation of all of the cases to the grand jury . This case was
unusual because it was presented to a grand jury unnecessarily and it was not presented by the
regular grand jury ASA. The State Attorney also had told the press that a variety of charges had
been presented to the grand jury and the jurors had selected the lowest charge of solicitation of
prostitution (with no designation of age). The transcript gave no indication that multiple charging
options were presented, and the jurors were only provided with evidence about one victim, not all
of the victims who had been the subjects of the investigation.
I believe that the next interaction was on September 12, 2007, when I attended a meeting
at the State Attorney 's Office with Andy Lourie and Rolando Garcia. Jay Lefkowitz , Gerald
Lefcourt , and Jack Goldberger attended on behalf of Mr. Epstein , and State Attorney Krischer and
ASA Lanna Behlolavek were present. At some point in the past, one of Epstein 's attorneys had
falsely told State Attorney Krischer that a person from the USAO had referred to the SAO as "a
joke." Messrs. Lourie and Garcia and I had to spend the first several minutes of the meeting
convincing State Attorney Krischer that no one had ever said such a thing. After crossing that
hurdle, we got to the core of the meeting, which was whether the SAO was in agreement with
filing charges and seeking a sentence consisting with the terms of the NPA — that is, a plea to an
Page 30 of 58
offense that required sex offender registration — namely, procuring a minor for prostitution in
violation of Fl. Stat. 796.03; and a sentence totaling 18 or 20 months' imprisonment.26 I recall
that either Mr. Lourie or I asked Ms. Behlolavek to confirm that § 796.03 required sex offender
registration, and she said that it did. Epstein 's attorneys also said that it did. We also specifically
discussed that Epstein would be confined for the term of imprisonment. State Attorney Krischer
said that a term of imprisonment of longer than one year usually required placement in a state
penitentiary, but there was a way to structure the sentence as a split sentence so that Epstein would
be housed at the Palm Beach County Jail. And we again confirmed that Epstein would remain in
custody at the jail, not home confinement or any other type of release and we were told that he
would be in jail. We also discussed wrapping the matter up quickly because of the extensive
delays.
On September 23, 2007, Jay Lefkowitz sent an email to Alex Acosta essentially admitting
that, during the meeting on September 12, 2007, Epstein 's attorneys and Ms. Behlolavek all
believed that a conviction for Fl. Stat. 796.03, procurement of minors for prostitution , did not
require sex offender registration — despite our specific inquiries (see Exhibit 51 ("I write to follow
up on our conversation on Friday and to ask you to reconsider your decision to require that Mr.
Epstein plead guilty to a registerable state charge. It appears that there was a misunderstanding at
the meeting I had with Messrs. Laurie, Krischer , Goldberger , Lefcourt , Ms. Villafana and Ms.
Belohlavek . . . . Before the meeting, Mr. Krischer , and Ms. Belohlavek , a sex prosecutor for 13
years, told us that solicitation of a minor, under 796.03, is not a registerable offense. However, as
it turned out, 796.03 is a registerable offense and our discussion at the meeting was based on a
mistaken assumption." (emphasis added)).
On December 6, 2007, ASA Behlolavek contacted me to draft a factual proffer and advised
that Epstein would be entering a guilty plea on December 21, 2007 (Exhibit 73). I did some
research on 796.03 and prepared a draft that I shared with FAUSA Sloman, but he decided not to
share the information with Ms. Behlolavek (see id).
While drafting this response, I searched my electronic files for Mr. ICrischer's name and
discovered a document entitled "071214 Acosta Ltr to Krischer .wpd" (Exhibit 69). I do not recall
drafting this letter, although I located a cover email stating that I drafted this and two other letters
for USA Acosta 's signature that were directed to the State Attorney 's Office (Exhibit 75). I do
not know if any of the letters were ever sent to Mr. Krischer .
In May 2008, Rolando Garcia had a discussion with State Attorney Krischer and Krischer
advised that he and Jack Goldberger had reached a new agreement for Epstein of 90 days in jail
(Exhibit B-39).
On June 17, 2008, Karen Atkinson and I spoke with State Attorney Krischer . He
complained that we had not been communicating with him, and we told him that Epstein 's counsel
had blocked the channels of communication (Exhibit 78). Krischer said that he and Jack
Goldberger had reached a new agreement where Epstein would plead guilty to "attempted lewd
conduct" and be sentenced to 60 days in the County Jail followed by two years of community
confinement (id.).
26 As noted above, I do not recall the exact date when USA Acosta agreed that 18 months'
imprisonment was sufficient.
Page 31 of 58
On June 19, 2008, I sent an email to State Attorney Krischer advising him that we had
spoken with Roy Black about wrapping up both the state and federal /times (Exhibit 68). I reminded
State Attorney Krischer that the signed NPA required a plea to the current state indictment and to
an information charging an offense that requires sex offender registration, namely procuring
minors to engage in prostitution , with a sentence of at least 18 months' imprisonment (id.).
I attended the change of plea on June 30, 2008 but did not have any contact with any
member of the SAO that day. Later, when the issue arose regarding whether or not Epstein was
taking the position that the NPA included USA Acosta 's December 2007 letter, I contacted Ms.
Behlolavek and SA Krischer to obtain a copy of what Epstein 's counsel had filed in state court.
In September 2008, I had communications with Mr. Krischer about a suit filed in state court
to unseal the NPA (Exhibit 70).
At some point, Mr. Krischer sent me an email about wanting to buy me a cup of coffee. I
was not able to find the email while preparing this response, but with additional time, I can
probably locate it. I don't believe I ever answered Mr. Krischer . I know I never met him for
coffee.
I recall that in many of Epstein 's letters to the Justice Department , there were complaints
of a lack of coordination between the USAO and the SAO. That lack of coordination was not
caused by the government agencies, but, rather, by the tactics of Epstein 's counsel. For example,
Epstein 's counsel insisted that I should conduct a completely independent review of the evidence
so that I would not be tainted by bias from the PBPD or the SAO. When I did so and reached a
conclusion that they did not like, Epstein 's attorneys insisted that Criminal Chief Senior and that
CEOS conduct similarly sterile reviews free from the "taint" of me and the federal agents. If Ms.
Atkinson and I or the agents and I reached out to the SAO to discuss how the NPA should be
worded to insure that we were getting correct information from Epstein 's attorneys, we were
accused of "infringing on the SAO's discretion." Yet, that "lack of coordination" that Epstein 's
attorneys caused, was later held up to the DAAG, the AAG, and DAG, as violations of the Petite
policy's state-federal coordination requirement.
8. Describe any research conducted by you, or anyone else within the USAO , into
law or policy regarding any of the following issues:
a. The propriety of permitting a person to plead guilty to state court
charges in exchange for an agreement by the USAO to refrain from
federal prosecution. In your response, you should identify any USAO
or Department policies that were considered by the USAO , and any
effort by the USAO to obtain guidance or approval from the
Department to use a non-prosecution agreement to resolve this case.
I did not do any research on this point. I do not know whether USA Acosta or Criminal
Chief Menchel conducted any research or obtained any guidance or approval from the Department.
Page 32 of 58
b. The propriety of including in a non-prosecution agreement with Mr.
Epstein a provision that the federal government would forgo
prosecution of any potential co-conspirators of Mr. Epstein , including
unidentified co-conspirators.
I do not recall doing any research on this particular point, other than discussing with
MAUSA Lourie that we would not pursue an investigation into Epstein 's subordinates after closing
the investigation of Epstein .
c. The propriety of including in the non-prosecution agreement a
provision incorporating 18 U.S.C. § 2255.
As noted above, I became familiar with § 2255 through my work as the PSC Coordinator.
I also was aware, as set forth in the victim notification letters that I prepared, that, under the CVRA ,
I was obligated to use my "best efforts" to protect the victims' rights to "full and timely restitution
as provided in law." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(6). As I discussed above, restitution in child exploitation
cases was an issue of growing concern, so I was mindful that this plea mechanism that Criminal
Chief Menchel had devised with Lilly Ann Sanchez would extinguish, the victims' right to
restitution. That was one of the reasons why, on July 4, 2007, I wrote to Mr. Menchel that I
believed the plea proposal violated the victims' rights legislation.
When Mr. Menchel announced in late July that USA Acosta was going forward with the
two-year state plea offer despite those concerns, I undertook my best efforts to still afford those
restitution rights to the victims identified through the federal investigation. Immediately after the
meeting where Mr. Menchel announced to me and the investigative team that USA Acosta
intended to offer a state plea, I delved further into the requirements for claims under § 2255
(Exhibit 37). While § 2255 is a civil damages statute, not a criminal restitution provision, the
criminal restitution statutory scheme recognizes that there is some overlap. See 18 U.S.C. §
3664(j)(2)(A), (1). Section 2255 also provides for attorneys' fees, just as courts can use court funds
to appoint guardians ad litem for minor victims in criminal cases who can advocate for restitution
for the victims. My review of the legislative history led me to conclude that the inclusion of a
provision under § 2255 would be the best way to protect the victims' right to restitution. CEOS
Chief Oosterbaan described the agreement as "a very significant result that will serve the victims
well" (Exhibit 71).
I should note that a plea to one of the federal crimes under investigation — with a 24-month
binding sentencing recommendation — would have achieved USA Acosta 's desired outcomes (24
months' imprisonment" and sex offender registration); would have provided federally mandated
restitution for the victims; and would have provided victims with court-funded representation via
the guardian ad litem program for those who needed it. All of these contortions were brought
about by the decision to use a state plea to resolve a federal investigation.
27 As noted above, I was never told the source of the 24-month figure. In my opinion, a
straight § 371 plea, with a five-year statutory maximum, was a significant concession.
Page 33 of 58
d. How the Florida state judicial system would address issues pertaining
to the terms of Mr. Epstein 's incarceration, including designation of an
appropriate facility, the availability of work release (or any similar
release condition), and the availability of other privileges. Identify
whether such research was conducted before or after the non-
prosecution agreement was signed, and whether it was conducted
before or after Mr. Epstein entered his state court plea. Describe any
communications you or other USAO personnel had with
representatives of the Palm Beach County State Attorney 's Office,
other law enforcement , or local corrections officials regarding these
matters.
One of my concerns about using a state forum to resolve this case was that it left our Office
with no control over the process. We also did not have any members of our team who had
experience with the Palm Beach County state courts — Criminal Chief Menchel had been a state
prosecutor in New York before joining the USAO ; I had been in private practice. Similarly, no
one else involved in the process had been an ASA or even a criminal defense attorney in Palm
Beach County . The defense team, on the other hand, included Roy Black and Jack Goldberger ,
who had extensive state court criminal experience in Palm Beach County . Any litigator will tell
you that knowing the Court is a key component of success, so we were placed at a distinct
disadvantage. It was exacerbated by defense counsel's tactics of prohibiting coordination between
the USAO and the SAO — which somehow was successful.28 It also required the USAO to place
an inordinate amount of trust in the SAO, when one of the reasons for opening the federal
investigation was the concerns that undue influence had been brought to bear on the State
Attorney .29
The loss of control did not just end with the Court proceedings, it included how the sentence
would be executed. Federal sentences are executed by the U.S. Marshals and the Bureau of
Prisons . All are housed within the Department of Justice and have clearly written rules and
regulations. BOP is used to housing wealthy, politically-connected offenders and would be less
likely to be unduly influenced by Epstein .
I attempted to build some certainty back into the agreement through several provisions.
First, I selected the state statutes that Epstein would have to plead guilty to and conducted my own
research to confirm that they required sex offender registration. Second, I included language that
28 Epstein 's team was equally successful in DC, where they dictated who could and could
not participate in the "independent review" at CEOS . For example, Myesha Braden, who had not
yet joined the Leap Year team, was excluded from consideration because she had disagreed with
Lilly Ann Sanchez about the handling of an obscenity case while Ms. Sanchez was an AUSA.
29 According to PBPD Chief Reiter , the State Attorney initially planned to file no charges
against Epstein . Following complaints, the SAO planned to charge Epstein with a misdemeanor
solicitation of adult prostitution charge. Then, after the police chief complained further, the State
Attorney assertedly presented "multiple charges" to the grand jury , and they "elected" to return an
indictment charging one felony count of soliciting adult prostitution . The State Attorney did not
intend to charge an offense requiring sex offender registration and was only seeking a sentence of
probation.
Page 34 of 58
he would have to plead guilty, not nolo contendere. Third, I researched different terms that Florida
courts would use that appeared to impose a term of incarceration, but really imposed something
else, and prohibited those sentences ("Epstein shall be sentenced to consecutive terms of twelve
(12) months and six (6) months in county jail for all charges, without any opportunity for
withholding adjudication or sentencing, and without probation or community control is lieu of
imprisonment" (Exhibit 52 at 3 (emphasis added)). Fourth, I included a waiver of the right to
challenge the Information and an appeal waiver. Fifth, I included a requirement that Epstein would
have to provide the USA° with a copy of his plea agreement with the SAO before he signed it.
Sixth, I required Epstein to use his best efforts to enter his guilty plea within approximately 30
days and an agreement that that term (like all others) was material. Seventh, I included an
agreement that Epstein would not be afforded any gain time benefits different from any other
inmate, and that he would provide an accounting of gain time if asked. Finally, "breach of any
one of these conditions allows the United States to elect to terminate the agreement and to
investigate and prosecute Epstein and any other individual or entity for any and all federal
offenses" (id. at 6).
In addition to the terms of the NPA , the agents and I also did our best to make sure that
Epstein would be serving jail time like anyone else. Prior to the September 12, 2007 meeting at
the State Attorney 's Office, I spoke with Andy Lourie and emailed Jeff Sloman about research I
had conducted on Florida sentencing practices to avoid "trucks up the sleeves of the defense"
(Exhibit 46 at I.) Normally a defendant who is sentenced to a term of prison in excess of 12
months must go to a state prison. The Office did not object to "splitting" Epstein 's sentence into
two pieces — 12 months followed by 6 months — so that he would be eligible to be housed at the
Palm Beach County Jail. All of us were, however, insistent that Mr. Epstein would actually serve
out his term at the jail like any other prisoner. At the September 12, 2007 meeting with the State
Attorney 's Office, this issue was specifically addressed, and State Attorney Krischer assured us
that Epstein would be at the Palm Beach County Jail (it is referred to as "Gun Club" because it is
located on Gun Club Road). I remember that they discussed that Epstein would be kept in solitary
confinement "for his own safety."
After that meeting, the case agents went to meet with the jail about the issue of work
release. I do not recall the exact date. On November 14, 2007, I sought FAUSA Sloman's
permission to meet with State Attorney Krischer after ASA Behlolavek stood up the agents a few
times. The purpose of my meeting was "to clear up the issue regarding sex offender
registration/work release and also should be able to tell us whether a plea and sentencing can be
scheduled this month" (Exhibit 72). FAUSA Sloman and Acting MAUSA Rolando Garcia had
conversations with the State Attorney and Jay Lefkowitz who both confirmed that Epstein would
"be a sex offender and he'll be treated like any other sex offender" (Exhibit 76 at 2). On November
16, 2007, the case agents met with ASA Belohlavek who said that Epstein would be housed at the
Palm Beach County Jail, so the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office would be in charge of whether Epstein
would be eligible for work release (id. at I). Special Agent Richards confirmed on November 16,
2007 that Epstein would not qualify for work release as a sex offender unless the judge specially
ordered it (id.).
As noted above, when we learned that Epstein 's attorneys were negotiating a new deal with
the State Attorney 's Office, Karen Atkinson and I firmly informed Epstein 's attorneys and the
State Attorney 's Office that there was a signed agreement. While they were free to negotiate
whatever they wanted, the terms they were discussing violated the NPA .
Page 35 of 58
In June 2008, when Epstein had exhausted his appeals to the DAG, in accordance with the
NPA , I asked to see the plea agreement that his attorneys had negotiated with the State Attorney 's
Office to insure that it was consistent with the NPA (Exhibit 77). After a number of requests to
Roy Black and Jack Goldberger , I finally received the document (id.). After conferring with an
AUSA who had previously worked at the Palm Beach County SAO, and with FAUSA Sloman, I
informed Messrs. Goldberger and Black that the agreement was insufficient because it did not
specify that the defendant was supposed to serve his sentence in a custodial setting (id.). After
providing the written notice, Mr. Goldberger agreed to make the change (id) Goldberger also
called me and "'swore' [his word] that Epstein would be in custody 24-hours-a-day during the
community confinement portion of the sentence" (Exhibit 79).
The agents also confirmed with local officers that the language in the state plea agreement
suggested that Epstein would be at the Palm Beach County Detention Center, a/k/a the Palm Beach
County Jail, and that, during their meeting with PBSO Col. Gauger several months before, he had
assured them that Epstein would be ineligible for work release (Exhibit 80). Nonetheless, we
decided that we would go meet with the Colonel together. Karen Atkinson joined us, and we
learned that, despite the language in the agreement, Epstein was housed at the stockade rather than
the jail (a lower security "camp-style" facility) (Exhibit 81). Gauger also told us that Epstein
would be eligible for work release and will be placed on work release — directly contradicting what
he had told the agents a few months before (id. ).30 We asked Col. Gauger to let us know if Epstein
did, in fact, apply for work release.
We never received any notice of Epstein 's application. Instead, on November 20, 2008,
when Gauger stopped by to see Karen Atkinson on another matter, he told her that Epstein had
been on work release for the past few weeks (Exhibit 82). S/A Kuyrkendall spoke with the work
release coordinator who told her that he was led to believe that the USAO and FBI knew that
Epstein had applied for the program. He also said that he had been threatened with being sued if
he didn't allow Epstein to participate (id) I reviewed my emails and notes of conversations with
Black, Goldberger , and other defense counsel about Epstein being incarcerated for the MI 18
months (except for credit for "gain time"). Criminal Chief Senior advised me to determine if there
was sufficient support to show a breach. After correspondence with Roy Black and a telephone
conference with Mr. Black and Jay Lefkowitz , we were advised that USA Acosta had informed
Mr. Leflcowitz3I that Epstein could be considered for any program that was available to other
prisoners. At that point, I was unable to press forward with a breach, so I conducted an in-depth
review of Epstein 's application and found numerous false statements that, in my opinion, should
have made the Sheriffs Office reverse its position regarding work release. I drafted a letter
cataloguing all of the misstatements and conflicts of interest (e.g., Epstein 's work release
supervisor was one of his employees who lived in New Jersey ) and submitted it to the Sheriff's
Office (Exhibits 83 and 84). I never received a response from the Sheriff's Office.
30 Gauger also said that Jack Goldberger had threatened that "Ken Starr and the whole
crew" would sue the jail if Epstein received less favorable treatment than others (id).
31 1 do not recall whether Alan Dershowitz or Ken Starr also was present for this meeting,
but no one else from the USAO was present.
Page 36 of 58
9. Describe all efforts made by you, or by anyone else within the USAO , to ensure
that Mr. Epstein complied with the terms of the non-prosecution agreement
(including its addendum) that he signed. Include in your response a discussion
of all breaches of the agreement by Mr. Epstein of which the USAO was aware,
and explain why the USAO decided not to rescind the agreement as a
consequence of such non-compliance, who was involved in that decision, and
how the decision was made.
Many instances of notices of breach have been catalogued throughout this letter, as well as
my efforts to force Epstein to abide by the terms of the NPA prior to declaring a breach (e.g.,
resisting efforts to change the state plea to one that did not require sex offender registration;
requiring Epstein 's counsel to provide us with copies of the state plea agreement before the plea;
requiring the appointment of the attorney-representative who representative the victims; etc.). The
attempt to declare a breach in connection with Epstein 's application for work release is discussed
above.
In June 2009, Epstein and his lawyers tried to dismiss a lawsuit filed in the Southern
District of Florida by the attorney-representative on behalf of one of the identified victims that
raised a single claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255. I prepared a lengthy memorandum analyzing why
Epstein 's actions were a breach and seeking permission to serve a breach letter (Exhibit 85). The
Office approved the request to serve the breach letter. At the same time, the indictment package
was re-reviewed and approved (Exhibit 86). The notice of breach letter was served on June 12,
2009 (Exhibit 87). Epstein promptly "cured" the breach, but I took the opportunity to catalogue
his past breaches and advised that continuing on that course of conduct would no longer be
tolerated (Exhibit 88). Perhaps sensing that the Office's patience had waned, perhaps having
gained a greater understanding (through the civil litigation ) of the strength of the potential criminal
case, Epstein 's counsel expressed a greater interest in avoiding problems. While I demurred on
their request that I essentially offer "advisory opinions," I suggested that Mr. Epstein should "take
all of his obligations seriously and elect to err on the side of caution in making decisions that relate
to the performance of his duties" (Exhibit 89).
In consideration of my warnings, Mr. Black contacted the USAO to advise us in advance
that Mr. Epstein was seeking to transfer his community control to the Virgin Islands and wanted
our position (Exhibit 90). Having the experience of all of the false statements on Epstein 's
application for work release, I immediately sought the application from Mr. Goldberger , but it was
never provided. I became concerned that Epstein 's attorneys would use the delay engendered by
Mr. Goldberger 's failure to provide me with the application as a bar to any objection, so I provided
a letter with preliminary objections (Exhibit 91). I noted that: "Throughout the negotiation of the
NPA , representations were repeatedly made by you and your colleagues that Mr. Epstein would
serve his complete sentence, including community control, in Palm Beach County . During his
change of plea and sentencing, Mr. Epstein told the Court that he intended to remain in Palm Beach
County during his period of community control — a fact that was important to Judge Pucillo in
making her decision whether or not to accept the plea agreement. Mr. Epstein 's presence in Palm
Beach County was important to the Court, our Office, and, presumably, the State Attorney 's
Office, because it allowed all of these entities to monitor Mr. Epstein 's performance of his
obligations. Relocating to the Virgin Islands , where Mr. Epstein lives on a private island without
any independent law enforcement presence, would eliminate that ability" (id.). Following my
letter, Mr. Epstein did not follow through on his application to transfer to the Virgin Islands .
Page 37 of 58
10. Identify any cases in which you have been involved as an AUSA, or of which
you were otherwise aware, that were resolved through a non-prosecution
agreement.
I have not been involved in, nor am I aware of, any other cases that have been resolved via
a non-prosecution agreement. On one occasion, in my eighteen years with the Justice Department ,
I recommended a Pre-Trial Diversion agreement for a doctor who wrote and filled a small number
of fraudulent opioid prescriptions that she took herself for her post-cancer pain. The
recommendation was vetted and approved through the chain of command in accordance with
Department policy (the USAM) and the USAO 's Criminal Circular.
B. CVRA Compliance
1. Describe your understanding of any USAO , Department, or FBI policy or
practice regarding victim notification rights, obligations, or procedures that
were in effect from the time the federal investigation of Mr. Epstein began to
the time that he entered his state plea, including the applicability of the CVRA
to cases resolved through non-prosecution agreements, and identify the
source(s) of such understanding. Explain when and how you became aware of
such policy or practice. Describe your prior experience notifying victims
under the CVRA . Explain whether and how victim notifications in the Epstein
case departed from the USAO 's general practice.
My understanding of USAO /DOJ victim notifications policies that were in effect in 2006-
2007 had come from my own work on PSC cases. I do not recall receiving any training from the
USAO on the CVRA or the AG 's Guidelines on Victims' Rights prior to the Epstein case. I was
familiar with the CVRA , the Victims' Rights and Restitution Act, and other pieces r victims'
rights legislation, primarily from two prior cases that I had handled. In United States O'Neil, I
had litigated the Office's first case where a defendant objected to a victim impact statement. It
was a case where a 41-year-old man gave a lethal overdose of heroin to his 23-year-old girlfriend .
The victim's mother, other family members, and the owner of the rehab center where the defendant
had recruited the victim all asked to address the Court. I cited the CVRA and other statutes to
support the Court's authority to hear from them. The second case was United States' Oliver,
which was the Office's first case seeking the appointment of a guardian ad litem (GAL). Through
these cases, I researched statutes, cases, the USAM, and the AG Guidelines. I recall that the
Guidelines were often described themselves as a floor, not a ceiling. See, e.g., Attorney General
Guideline for Victim and Witness Assistance (May 2005) at 8 ("A strong presumption exists in
favor of providing rather than withholding assistance and services to victims and witnesses of
crime."). Like most PSC prosecutors and investigators, the agents and I treated the AG 's
Guidelines as a floor and tried to provide a higher standard of contact.
That is why, during the Epstein investigation, victim rights notification letters were
provided at the first meeting between the agents and victims encouraging victims to contact me
directly with questions and concerns. Throughout the investigation, I tried to meet in person with
as many victims as possible and talk through their concerns. Many were afraid of Mr. Epstein ;
many were afraid that their reputations would be ruined; almost all wanted to just put the episode(s)
behind them. Some had not even told their parents about what had happened and did not want
Page 38 of 58
their parents to know. Several girls needed counseling and at least one attempted suicide . S/As
Kuyrkendall and Richards, Victim-Witness Specialist Smith, and I all worked to find counseling
for those who wanted it through Palm Beach County Victim Services, and I reported the issues to
Karen Atkinson, Andy Lourie (when he was still in West Palm Beach ), and Jeff Sloman. I also
recall sending and receiving emails regarding the emotional toll on the victims when agents and I
enquired into the status of the indictment review.
With regard to specific office procedures at the time of the Epstein investigation, there was
no victim-witness coordinator in West Palm Beach and no standardized way to do any victim
notifications prior to indictment. Our Office's procedure — which was still being developed at the
time of the Epstein investigation — required a victim list to be submitted along with the indictment
package. That victim list would be used to notify victims of upcoming court proceedings — to the
extent that those upcoming court dates appeared in the case tracking system used at the time.
Conferring with victims regarding plea negotiations could not happen through that victim
notification system, so my practice, when possible, was to ask agents to work with me to contact
victims about a potential plea. I also asked agents to work with me to notify victims of court dates
because I knew there was a delay with the victim notification system. For example, often a
defendant will decide the day before or the day of calendar call or trial to plead guilty. If it is a
case with victims, like a bank robbery case, the agents and I will do our best to contact the victims
to advise and confer, and to invite the victims to appear at the change of plea if they wish. The
victims also are informed that they will have the opportunity to give a victim impact statement for
purposes of sentencing.
In child exploitations cases where there has been a lot of contact with the victims, these
last-minute interactions are less likely. I usually discuss potential plea scenarios with the
parents/victims/GALs in advance and the judges aren't as rushed. The exception is child
pornography possession/distribution cases, where the victims often are not identified prior to the
plea.32 Especially during the time of the Epstein investigation, the procedures for identifying
victims in child pornography cases were in their infancy. Now, victims from many child
pornography "series" have been identified and have attorney contact information for purposes of
restitution. CEOS ' Gelber is the national expert in this area.
To summarize, my understanding of my obligation was: to do my best to notify victims of
upcoming court proceedings and to make them feel welcome to — but not obligated to — participate
(unless subpoenaed, of course); to guard their privacy and help them navigate the process to come
out as unscathed as possible; to insure their safety from interference from the defendant; to listen
to their desires in terms of prosecution, plea, and sentencing and balance that with the other factors
that go into prosecutorial discretion33 in making decisions about the case; and to be mindful that
decisions that I and the Office made would impact them. I understood that conferring with the
victims did not mean that I had to agree with them or that they could override an Office decision.
For example, in the Oliver case, we had a plea offer for a lengthy sentence. The victim's father
believed that we should take the case to trial. The GAL and I did not believe that, given the age
32 These are cases where the defendant is not believed to be involved in the production of
the child pornography .
33 Those other factors include the need to do justice, to deter the defendant and others, and
to consider the impact of the prosecution on the local and national community.
Page 39 of 58
of the defendant, it made sense to put the victim, who was, I believe, 9 years' old at the time,
through the stress of a trial. After conferring with my supervisor, we decided to go forward with
the change of plea. The victim's father and the GAL made victim-impact statements and, in the
end, the judge imposed a sentence of 140 years' imprisonment followed by lifetime supervised
release.
With regard to the Epstein investigation in particular, the handling of victim notifications
varied from my understanding and my practice in two significant ways. First, it never occurred to
me that this was not a situation where conferring with the victims was required. I specifically
informed the Office in writing on two occasions and orally on other occasions, that I thought the
victims should be consulted before entering into the Non-Prosecution Agreement.34 The first of
these written reminders was in July 2007 when I learned that Criminal Chief Menchel had engaged
in plea discussions with Lilly Ann Sanchez . (Exhibit 3.) The second was in early September 2007
after my discussion with CEOS Chief Drew Oosterbaan regarding this subject. (Exhibit 44.) Later,
I believe after the NPA was already signed, Jeff Sloman told me that the Office had taken the
position in other cases that there is no obligation to confer in the absence of the filing of a federal
case, but I don't recall discussing that at the time. 35 I had never before used a non-prosecution
34 As I noted in my filings in the Jane Doe ' United States litigation , I had concerns about
informing the victims that part of the negotiations involved securing for them the right to obtain
damages from Epstein until we knew that Epstein would, in fact, enter into and perform his
obligations under the NPA . As stated above, during the State investigation, Epstein 's counsel had
frequently accused the victims of faking or exaggerating their statements for purposes of civil
damages claims. In a deposition for one of the civil suits, one of Epstein 's lawyers later falsely
accused Jeff Sloman and me of telling a victim that she could get damages from Epstein if she told
the FBI that Epstein had assaulted her. (I can locate and redact this transcript.) I nevertheless
believed that we could and should have discussed other aspects of the NPA with them — that is,
the state guilty plea, sex offender registration, and the sentence. The AG Guidelines specifically
take into account situations like this, so I could have discussed jail time, sex offender registration,
avoiding trial, the right to address the court at sentencing, but, applying my discretion, decided not
to tell them about the monetary portion of the agreement. See 2005 AG Guidelines at 30 ("In
determining what is reasonable [in notifying identified victims about prospective plea
negotiations] the responsible official should consider factors relevant to the wisdom and
practicality of giving notice and considering views in the context of the particular case, including,
but not limited to, . . . [w]hether the victim is a possible witness in the case and the effect that
relating any information may have on the defendant's right to a fair trial.").
35 Regardless of that position, as noted earlier, the decision to resolve the case through a
non-prosecution agreement was made by Chief Menchel , and his email of July 5, 2007 informed
me that he was the person vested with the discretion to vary from any Department policy and that
he had undertaken his actions with USA Acosta 's knowledge. I relied upon their knowledge of
the CVRA and exercise of discretion on this issue. (See Exhibit 3; see also 2005 AG Guidelines
at 10-11 ("Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 10607(a), the Attorney General is request to designate persons
in the Department of Justice who will be responsible for identifying the victims of crime and
performing the services described in that section. These persons are referred to as 'responsible
officials' in the statute and throughout these AG Guidelines. . . . Responsible officials may delegate
their responsibilities under these AG Guidelines to subordinates in appropriate circumstances, but
Page 40 of 58
agreement or deferred prosecution in favor of state prosecution in the way that the Epstein case
was handled. I believed that the fairest course was to consult with the victims before the execution
of any agreement.
The second significant departure from my regular practice was the victim notification
procedure. Never before or since have I shared "drafts" of victim notifications with counsel for
the defendants. The CVRA places the entire burden of complying with the Act on the government
and the court and provides that a "person accused of the crime may not obtain any form of relief
under this Chapter." 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(1) (2004). But, in this case, I was required to provide
draft victim notification letters, rewrite them due to objections from defense counsel, and refrain
from sending them altogether. My protestations appear in my emails, and were shared with the
agents, my legal assistant, and my supervisors.
With regard to FBI policies and practices, I understood that the FBI had its own victim
notification procedures. I had previously worked with Twiler Smith on other cases (and worked
with her on other cases after the Epstein investigation). I did not know the details of what FBI
included in its letters or when they were sent. I did not instruct FBI on what to send or when to
send it. My general rule is to tell agencies to follow their regular procedures. I don't remember
saying anything different in this case. I did not see any FBI letters in this case prior to collecting
the FBI letters to Brad Edwards ' clients in connection with the Jane Doe I United States litigation .
I did not instruct the FBI to include the language about the case being under investigation and that
they should be patient.
2. Identify all victims in this case to whom written or oral notifications were
made, when and how each notification was made, and the contents of the
notifications. Explain why notifications were made to some victims, and not
to others, and who was responsible for those decisions.
On the attached chart (Exhibit B-1), I listed all of the individuals identified as victims
during the state investigation, the federal investigation, or after Epstein entered his state guilty
plea, but who were brought to my attention by various attorneys. The chart lays out how and when
each was contacted. Due to the passage of time, it is impossible for me to give exact dates and the
exact content of each conversation. Also, there are some victims that I specifically remember
meeting with. There are some that I know I did not meet with. There are others that I believe I
met with, but I am not certain. I have qualified my answers on the chart accordingly.
On August 4, 2006, I prepared 24 Victim Notification Letters for victims who had been
identified during the state investigation. (Exhibit 12.) These were provided to Special Agent
Kuyrkendall to hand-deliver to victims during interviews. I decided to prepare these letters and I
decided on the content of those letters.
On August 11, 2006, 18 amended letters were prepared. (Exhibit 13.) These letters
clarified that the recipients were victims and/or witnesses , since we had not yet been able to
confirm that they were minors during the time of their encounters with Epstein and we were still
working to confirm federal jurisdiction. People who had already received the August 4, 2006
responsible officials remain obliged to ensure that all such delegated responsibilities are
discharged. The Attorney General designates the following responsible officials: .. . For cases in
which charges have been filed—the U.S. Attorney in whose district the prosecution is pending."))
Page 41 of 58
letters did not receive August 11, 2006 letters. If an August 11, 2006 letter was prepared, I believe
that meant that the agents had not yet made contact with the person and the agents discarded the
August 4, 2006 letter. We included letters for witnesses who we knew were over the age of 18 to
advise them to contact us if they felt they were being harassed because the agents had learned of
potential harassment during the early set of interviews. I decided to prepare these letters after
discussing the issue with Special Agent Kuyrkendall and I decided on the content of those letters.
Although I do not have a clear recollection of this, I believe that a new letter was issued
for Individual #4 because the agents had difficulty interviewing her and did not want to provide
her with a letter that was several months old. On June 7, 2007, I simply printed the same letter
with a new date and signed it. (Exhibit 30.) I do not believe that the August 11, 2006 letter was
ever provided to her. The same explanation applies for the June 7, 2007 letters for Individuals 9,
31, 38, and 43. (Exhibit 30.) Individuals 3 and 40 were not identified until several months into
the federal investigation. Victim notification letters were prepared for them on June 7, 2007.
(Exhibit 30.) I decided to prepare these letters after discussing the issue with Special Agent
Kuyrkendall and I decided on the content of the letters.
As discussed above, in July 2007 and September 2007, I raised in writing the need to confer
with the victims regarding the proposed agreement with Epstein . I also raised the issue in internal
conversations with supervisors, agents, and others. I was told that I could not discuss the matter
with the victims. (See Exhibits 3 and 44.)
After the Non-Prosecution Agreement was signed, I drafted a notification letter to inform
the victims of the terms of the agreement and the date of the state court proceedings. After several
delays, the state plea and sentencing date was set for December 9, 2007. On November 19, 2007,
I prepared the draft notification that appears at Exhibit B-2 based upon my reading of the NPA and
research I had conducted on state law. (See Exhibit B-7.) Several blanks appeared because we
were still waiting for Epstein 's counsel to confirm that Epstein would pay the fees of the attorney-
representative selected by the Special Master.
A second draft of the plea notification letter was prepared on November 27, 2007 at 7:11
p.m. for Jeff Sloman's review. (Exhibit B-3.96 On November 28, 2007 at 9:42 p.m. a third draft
was prepared for Jeff Sloman's review. (Exhibit B-4). This version was shared with counsel for
Epstein . (Exhibits B-8). On November 29, 2007, Jay Lefkowitz , counsel for Epstein , objected to
the victim notification letter in a letter to USA Acosta . (Exhibit B-9). USA Acosta asked Mr.
Lefkowitz to discuss the matter with Jeff Sloman and me. (Exhibit B-10).
On December 5, 2007, Kenneth Starr and Jay Lefkowitz wrote a letter to USA Acosta
requesting an updated victim notification letter incorporating their objections. (Exhibit B-11). On
December 6, 2007, Jeff Sloman sent a letter to Jay Letkowitz, which attached another proposed
victim notification letter. (Exhibit B-12). There was significant internal correspondence regarding
my concerns that the Government needed to meet its obligation to inform the victims of the
upcoming plea. (Exhibit B-13). After providing a final draft to the Miami office on December 7,
36 This document was converted from Word Perfect, which caused the formatting
problems.
Page 42 of 58
2007, (Exhibit B-63'), later that day, my legal assistant and I prepared 32 victim notification letters
and envelopes to send. (Exhibit B-14). At 5:08 pm, I received an email from Jeff Sloman that
said, "Hold the letter" (Exhibit B-54).
On December 10 007, I contacted Jim Eisenberg, counsel for Individual # 28, who is Jane
Doe #2 in the Jane Doe I United States suit. As noted on the attached chart, Mr. Eisenberg was
paid for by Mr. Epstein . I told Mr. Eisenberg that I was preparing victim notification letters and
needed to know if he was still representing Individual #28. He said that he was and instructed me
to send the letter to him. My continued designation of Individual #28 as a victim, based upon the
statements of other witnesses and the documentary evidence collected by federal and state agents,
was one of the main bases that Epstein 's counsel used to support their allegations of prosecutorial
misconduct with officials at the Department of Justice . (See Exhibit B-20.) Based upon those
attacks, which relied upon the videotaped statement given by Individual #28, I was instructed by
either Jeff Sloman or Alex Acosta , not to consider Individual #28 as a victim for purposes of the
NPA because she was not someone whom the Office was prepare to include in an indictment.
On December 7, 2007, Lilly Ann Sanchez sent a letter to Jeff Sloman fmally providing the
USAO with the date and time of the change of plea for Mr. Epstein . (Exhibit B-15). Based upon
that information, on December 14, 2007, I prepared another version of the victim notification
letter. (Exhibit B-I 638). I provided a copy via email to Alex Acosta , Jeff Sloman, Rolando Garcia,
and Karen Atkinson. (Exhibit B-17). On December 17, 2007, I sent an email to Jeff Sloman
inquiring about the status of the case and informing him that the agents also were expressing their
concerns about the delays in victim notifications. (Exhibit B-18). Over my objection, my request
to send the victim notification letter was not approved, and on December 19, 2007, USA Acosta
sent a letter to Lilly Ann Sanchez stating, "I understand that the defense objects to the victims
being given notice of [the] time and place of Mr. Epstein 's state court sentencing hearing. I have
reviewed the proposed victim notification letter and the statute. ... We will defer to the discretion
of the State Attorney to determine if he wishes to provide victims with notice of the state
proceedings, although we will provide him with the information necessary to do so if he wishes."
(Exhibit B-19.) Although I did not know it at the time, in preparing this response, I noticed that,
in FAUSA Sloman's June 3, 2008 letter to DAG Filip , he stated that the quoted language was
proposed by USA Acosta "in consultation with DAAG Mandelker." (Exhibit B-123 at 7.)
On December 21, 2007, attorney Jay Lefkowitz expounded on a new challenge — that Mr.
Epstein had not been provided with a list of the victims and an opportunity to challenge the list
prior to signing the NPA . I made clear verbally and in writing that I would not expose the victims
to further harassment while Epstein was clearly trying to wheedle his way out of pleading guilty
and going to prison. As I told Mr. Lefkowitz , I had devised a system to address this concern prior
to the signing of the NPA ; since Epstein 's team of attorney's had not requested the right to see and
challenge the list, I had not offered it. A few days later, Lefkowitz again wrote to the U.S. Attorney
stating that he did not think our Office should provide any notifications; they should come only
" This document was converted from Word Perfect, which caused the formatting
problems.
38 This document was converted from Word Perfect, which caused the formatting
problems.
Page 43 of 58
from the State Attorney 's Office. Lefkowitz insisted on the right to review the letters. (Exhibit
B-22).39
The matter was tabled while Epstein was allowed time to raise his federal jurisdiction,
sufficiency, and prosecutorial misconduct challenges with CEOS , the DAAG, and the AAG.
While everything was supposed to be "on hold" pending those reviews, I learned that Epstein was
trying to contact some of the victims — victims who would have been represented if Epstein had
performed his obligations under the terms of the NPA . I then worked to find pro bono counsel for
those victims (Exhibit B-23).
On May 15, 2008, CEOS , DAAG Mandelker, and AAG Fisher completed their review,
finding that our case against Epstein was neither improper nor inappropriate (Exhibit B-24). By
that time, a revised indictment package had already been reviewed and approved (Exhibits B-25
through B-28). Additional victims also had been identified through the continued investigation
(Exhibits B-29 through B-31).
On May 19, 2008, FAUSA Sloman wrote to counsel for Epstein giving Epstein two weeks
to enter his guilty plea in state court in accordance with the terms of the NPA (Exhibit B-32).
Rather than performing, Epstein sought continued review, again alleging prosecutorial
misconduct and challenging both the sufficiency of the evidence and the federal interest in the
case. At this point, Epstein sought review from Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip (Exhibit B-
33), and he hired Joe Whitley to join his defense team. I was informed that Epstein 's deadline to
enter his guilty plea would be extended again, and we continued preparing for indictment (Exhibits
B-34 through B-37). So, on May 27, 2008, Bob Senior, who took Matt Menchel 's place as
Criminal Chief, Jeff Sloman, who had taken over for USA Acosta due to his recusal from the
Epstein matter, Karen Atkinson, and 1 all had an email exchange agreeing that there would be no
further negotiations and that the case would be indicted (Exhibit B-38).
At the same time, the agents heard that Epstein was trying to strike a new deal with the
State Attorney 's Office — one that would require less jail time (Exhibit B-39) (discussed below).
While the DAG completed his review, I was told that the grand jury presentation would be
delayed again (Exhibit B-40). I was then tasked with drafting the USAO 's letter to DAG Filip in
response to Epstein 's challenges.
While the case was being investigating and prepared for indictment, I did not prepare or
send any victim notification letters — there simply was nothing to update. I did not receive any
victim calls during this time. I did receive communications from two attorneys. In March 2008,
I received a letter from attorney Richard Willits, advising me that he represented Individual #3 and
that he had filed suit on her behalf against Epstein in Palm Beach County Circuit Court (Exhibit
B-41). I responded, acknowledging his representation (Exhibit B-42). On June 18, 2008, I
livreceived a call from attorney Brad ards, who told me that he represented Individual #43, who
is also Jane Doe #1 in the Jane Doe United States lawsuit. Mr. Edwards expressed an interest
in assisting with the case. We were still waiting to hear about whether we would be moving
" On the State side, Lefkowitz has consistently taken the position that there were only two
victims related to the state offenses. Thus, if only the State provided notifications, only two victims
would receive notices of the hearing and Epstein would avoid a full sentencing hearing.
Page 44 of 58
forward to indictment. I invited him to send whatever information he could and expressed that
time was of the essence (Exhibit B-43). Given the uncertainty of the situation — Epstein was still
challenging our ability to prosecute him federally, pressing allegations of prosecutorial
misconduct, and trying to negotiate better plea terms, while the agents, my supervisors, and I were
all moving towards indictment — I did not feel comfortable sharing any information about the case.
It also is my practice not to talk about status before the grand jury . For those reasons, and because
I had never met Mr. Edwards, I listened more than I spoke.
Early on June 23, 2008, FAUSA Sloman emailed Criminal Chief Senior saying that, if the
USAO received the go-ahead from the DAG's Office, I should immediately notify Epstein 's
attorneys that Epstein would only have until June 3011' to comply with the September 246
agreement or be held in breach. Later that day, Mr. Senior responded, cc'ing me, instructing me
to send out that notification (Exhibit B-49). On June 23, 2008, DAG Filip completed his review,
and John Roth sent a letter to Attorneys Starr and Lefkowitz stating their finding that there was no
abuse of discretion and no misconduct (Exhibit B-44). I immediately sent an email to Jay
Lefkowitz in accordance with Mr. Senior's instructions (Ex. B-49). The following day, Roy Black
and Jack Goldberger , as local counsel for Epstein , contacted me to wrap up the details of
performing pursuant to the terms of the NPA (Exhibit B-45). On June 25 and 26, 2008, there were
a series of internal communications regarding victim notification letters and providing Epstein
with a final list of victims (Exhibits B-46, B-47, B-48). I provided my draft victim notification
letter to FAUSA Sloman and USA Acosta (Exhibits B-47, B-48).4° Since Mr. Acosta had agreed
in December 2007 that we would not provide written notice of the state change of plea, the written
victim notifications were prepared to be sent immediately following Epstein 's guilty plea. The
FBI was working on finalizing the victim list to disclose to Epstein (Exhibit B-50). I requested
permission to make oral notifications to the victims regarding the upcoming change of plea, but
the Office decided that victim notifications could only come from a state investigator, and Jeff
Sloman asked PBPD Chief Reiter to assist (Exhibit B-52).
On Friday, June 27, 2008, we received notification that Epstein 's change of plea and
sentencing would occur the following Monday, June 30, 2008 (Exhibit B-51). I made two calls to
try to spread the word about the state change of plea. Following up on FAUSA Sloman's call from
the previous day, I called Chief Reiter and asked him to notify the victims (Exhibit B-53). I also
called Brad Edwards as counsel for Individuals 35 and 43,41 and strongly encouraged him and his
clients to attend. He said that someone would try to be there. I had not been authorized by the
Office to disclose the terms of the NPA , so I could not be more explicit in my conversation with
him (Exhibit B-54).
After the change of plea on June 30, 2008, I made calls to the attorneys whom I knew
represented identified victims in civil suits to confirm that they wanted me to send their clients'
victim notification letters to the attorneys (Exhibit B-55). Also, as directed by my Office, I
40 Exhibits B-47 and 8-48 consist of emails with draft victim notification letters attached.
Due to changes in word processing systems, some of the attachments, as well as other drafts, have
formatting issues when they were printed. My original draft was prepared on 6/25/2008 at 3:57
pm. I revised it at 5:23 p.m. that same day. I received a revised version from USA Acosta and
FAUSA Sloman at 6:00 p.m. on June 25111.
41 Mr. Edwards also was representing Individual #28 at the time, but I did not know that.
Page 45 of 58
provided a draft of the proposed victim notification letter to counsel for Epstein (Exhibit B-56). I
was concerned that Epstein and his counsel were again creating a potential problem. USA Acosta
had taken the position that the final NPA consisted of three documents — the 9/24/2007 NPA , the
10/29/2007 Addendum, and the 12/19/07 letter from USA Acosta to Lilly Ann Sanchez . I prepared
victim notifications (and, later, a Declaration in the Jane Doe litigation ) based upon this
understanding. When Epstein entered his guilty plea, Judge McSorley required him to file his
federal Non-Prosecution Agreement with the Court since that formed part of the consideration for
the state plea. I wanted to confirm that Epstein was taking a consistent position with the State
Attorney 's Office, Judge McSorley, and the USAO , so I asked for a copy of what was filed in the
State Court. This led to multiple letters with counsel for Epstein before I could finalize the victim
notification letters (Exhibits B-57 through B-65). On July 9, 2008, I finally sent the first two
victim notification letters to two of Brad Edwards ' clients, Individuals 35 and 43 (Exhibit B-66).
Whenever I sent a victim notification letter, a redacted version of the letter also was sent to Jack
Goldberger , counsel for Jeffrey Epstein . I was not authorized to send a victim notification letter
to Individual # 28 or to include her on the list of persons provided to Epstein because she was not
a person that the Office was prepared to name in an indictment.42
On July 10, 2008, I sent victim notification letters to a number of other represented victims,
Individuals 3, 8, 17, 25, 26, 37, and 44 (Exhibit B-67). The FBI also asked for some assistance of
language to use in its own victim notifications (Exhibit B-68), and I was waiting for contact
information for the unrepresented victims (Exhibit B-69). On July 21, 2008, I sent victim
notification letters to a group of unrepresented victims, Individuals 1, 2, 4, 9, 13, 14, 21, 23, 30,
32, and 38 (Exhibit B-70). There were some unrepresented victims who did not receive
notification letters on July 21, 2008 because the FBI had not been able to confirm mailing
addresses by that time — Individuals 10, 11, 16, 18, 20, 24, 31, 33, 36, 39, 40, and 42.
In August 2008, the issue of "which version of the NPA controls" finally came to a head.
On August 5, 2008, in the context of a Notice of Breach, I pressed my Office to clarify the issue
(Exhibit B-71). The decision was made to require Epstein to elect either the 12/19/07 letter or not,
but to make it clear in writing (Exhibits B-73 through B-82). On August 15, 2008, I wrote to Roy
Black and Jay Lefkowitz confirming their position that the final agreement consisted only of the
NPA and Addendum (Exhibit B-83). By discarding USA Acosta 's December 2007 modification,
the original terms providing for the attorney representative for the victims came back into effect,
and the victim notification letters for the unrepresented victims were even more important. Mr.
Lefkowitz responded on August 18, 2008 with "objections" in advance to the language of the
victim notifications (Exhibit B-84). On August 21, 2008, I responded to Mr. Lefkowitz with a
draft victim notification letter corresponding to the language contained in the NPA and Addendum
and noted the importance of promptly providing corrected information to the victims (Exhibit B-
85). The following day, Mr. Lefkowitz sent a letter with indeterminate objections to the letter
(Exhibit B-86). I responded by pointing out that the language in the victim notification letter was
taken verbatim from the NPA and Addendum (Exhibit B-87).
On September 2, 2008, Mr. Lefkowitz finally confirmed that Mr. Goldberger would be the
designated recipient for victim notifications and that Mr. Epstein would pay the attorney
representative's fees (Exhibit B-88). I immediately started distributing victim notification letters.
42 That decision was made by USA Acosta and/or FAUSA Sloman. I do not know which.
Page 46 of 58
On that date, Notification Letters were sent directly to Individuals 1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 11,43 13, 14, 16,
20,44 21, 23, 24, 30, 31, 32,45 33, and 38, and via counsel to Individuals 3, 8, 17, 25, 26, 37, and
44 (Exhibit B-89). On September 3, 2008, Notification Letters were sent via counsel to Individuals
35 and 43, and via FBI Legal Attaches to Individuals 36 and 42 (Exhibit B-90). On September
12, 2008, I sent a Notification Letter to Individual 39 (Exhibit B-91). On September 15, 2008, I
sent Notification Letters to Individuals 18 and 32 (Exhibit B-92).
Soon thereafter, I received a letter from Jeffrey Herman, one of the civil attorneys who
represented a number of victims, notifying me that he had complained to the Florida Bar that the
Victim Notification Letters violated the Florida Bar rules against solicitation. He had filed
complaints against myself and against Robert Josefsberg — the attorney-representative selected by
the Special Master. On September 18, 2008, I wrote to the Florida Bar asking for an Ethics opinion
(Exhibit B-93). I did not feel that I could send out any additional notifications until I received a
response to that inquiry. The Florida Bar eventually issued a letter reviewing the relevant rules
that (a) contacts with represented and unrepresented persons required by law are permitted and (b)
business solicitation prohibitions are limited to those motivated by pecuniary gain. Thereafter, I
issued notification letters to Individuals 20 and 40 on November 14, 2008 (Exhibit B-94).
I only issued one other set of victim notifications: when I learned that Epstein had been
allowed out on work release. While it technically was not required, I knew that the State
Attorney 's Office had not provided the notice, so I wanted to provide the victims with at least the
option to take advantage of "exclusionary zones.i 46 On December 4, 2008, I drafted a work release
notice, which was approved by my office (Exhibit B-95). The following day, I sent work release
notices to attorneys for Individuals 1, 2, 3, 8, 13, 14, 17, 20, 21, 25, 26, 28, 31, 32, 35, 35, 43, and
44 (Exhibit B-96). On December 8, 2008, I sent work release notices to attorneys for Individuals
7, 9, 17, and 37, and I sent notices directly to Individuals 11, 39, and 40 (Exhibit B-97). On
December 9, 2008, I mailed work release notices directly to Individuals 4, 10, 16, 18, 23, 24, 30,
33, and 38 (Exhibit B-98). On December 11, 2008, I followed up with the attorneys about whether
any of their clients wanted to take advantage of the "Exclusionary Zone" option in Epstein 's GPS
unit (Exhibit B-99). There was a bit of correspondence and telephone calls about this, but
ultimately none of the victims elected to participate in this. On December 12, 2008, I send the
work release notice to Individual #42 (Exhibit B-100).
I am not aware of any other notices provided to victims in connection with this case.
43 The letter was returned on September 12, 2008, and Individual #11 was contacted by
phone. She came to the office and picked up the letter in person on September 16, 2008.
44 The letter was returned on September 15, 2008. A new letter was sent on November 14,
2008 to a corrected address.
45 The letter was returned on September 11, 2008. A new letter was sent on September 15,
2008. At Individual #32's request, a copy was sent to her and with a copy to Jeffrey Herman, Esq.
46 "Exclusionary zones" can be programmed into a GPS tracking unit to send an alarm if a
prisoner on work release enters into a prohibited area — e.g., a four-block radius of a victim's
residence.
Page 47 of 58
3. Identify all individuals within the USAO and FBI who had a role in
determining whether, when, how, and to which victims to provide victim
notifications in the Epstein case and explain what decisions were made and the
basis for them.
Greater detail is provided in the answer to Item B-2, above, and the exhibits referenced
therein. Normally the line AUSA is the person who handles deciding who should receive victim
notifications. Prior to indictment, the line AUSA has responsibility for those notifications, in
conjunction with the case agents. Post-indictment, a victim list is provided to the victim-witness
coordinator who is supposed to issue letters (again, I do not know how automated that was in 2006-
2008). In this matter, I made the decision to make contact with victims early and I decided on the
content of the introductory letters as well as the recipients of those letters. At the time of plea
negotiations, Criminal Chief Menchel made the decision that he had the authority to vary from the
general policy of conferring with victims before entering into a plea. I do not know the basis for
that decision (see Exhibit 3). His email to me said that the decision was made with USA Acosta 's
concurrence. I do not know the veracity of that statement. I know that, even after Chief Menchel
left the USAO , as the plea negotiations continued, when I re-raised the issue of conferring with
the victims after discussing it with CEOS Chief Drew Oosterbaan (see Exhibit 44), the Office still
did not confer. I do not know the basis for this decision.
Regarding providing notifications of the date of the change of plea, I drafted several
iterations of a notification letter and also asked to provide oral notifications. USA Acosta decided
that the USAO should not provide any notifications of a state court proceeding. From the
correspondence that he drafted, the basis for doing so was that it was a state proceeding, not a
federal one, so the notice should come from the State Attorney 's Office.
With regard to the FBI , my understanding is that Twiler Smith, the victim specialist, in
conjunction with Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, the case agent, had primary responsibility for making
victim notifications and the content of those. I do not know if anyone else within the FBI played
any role in those decisions, and, with regard to their standard victim notification letters, I do not
believe that anyone from the USAO played any role. I know that the FBI deferred to the USAO ,
and to USA Acosta 's decision not to confer with the victims in advance of signing the NPA . I also
know that the FBI also deferred to USA Acosta 's decision not to inform the victims of the state
court plea.
4. Identify any effort made by the government to notify the victims, either in
writing or through other means, that it intended to enter into a non-
prosecution agreement with Mr. Epstein , or had entered into such an
agreement. For all such efforts, identify the victims notified, when, and by
whom. If some or all of the victims were not notified about the non-
prosecution agreement, explain why and identify the individuals responsible
for the decision.
Greater detail is provided in the answer to Item B-2, above, and the exhibits referenced
therein. In short, while I requested permission to confer with the victims in advance of entering
into the NPA , that permission was denied. So no one notified the victims that the government
intended to enter into a non-prosecution agreement. Immediately after the government entered
into the NPA , I prepared notification letters, but the U.S. Attorney decided that these letters also
should not be sent out. The case agents made oral notifications to two identified victims in October
Page 48 of 58
2007, but they became concerned that it appeared that Epstein was going to renege on the NPA .
The agents suspected that, at trial, Epstein would allege that the agents had told the victims that
they could get money from Epstein . So they decided to suspend the notifications until Epstein was
indicted or his "challenges" to the NPA and the investigation were settled.
5. Explain why victims who received victim notification letters after the non-
prosecution agreement was first signed in September 2007 were notified in the
letters that the federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein "is currently under
investigation." Explain whether you, or other government personnel,
considered whether the statement was accurate in light of the non-prosecution
agreement; describe the process leading to the decision to so advise the victims;
and describe any discussions among government personnel concerning the
statement and its accuracy, occurring before or after it was made.
The letters containing the quoted language were prepared by FBI victim-witness specialist
Twit Smith and I was unaware of them until they were collected in connection with the Jane
Doe United States litigation . I do not recall ever discussing the wording of the FBI 's letters
prior to their distribution. The decision to issue the letters and the wording of those letters were
exclusively FBI decisions.
Even though I was unaware of the language at the time, there is no doubt that from the
perspective of the agents and myself the matter was, in fact, "currently under investigation." The
NPA was signed on September 24, 2007. The letters that Judge Marra referred to in his order were
dated January 10, 2008 and May 30, 2008. During the period that the letters were sent, Epstein
was asserting that: (a) there was insufficient evidence to charge him with any offense; (b) there
was no basis for federal prosecution and that federal prosecution violated the Petite policy; (c) I
had engaged in prosecutorial misconduct during the investigation and resolution of the matter; (d)
Jeff Sloman had engaged in prosecutorial misconduct during the investigation and resolution of
the matter; (e) Special Agent Kuyrkendall had engaged in misconduct during the investigation of
the matter; and (f) the NPA violated public policy because of its inclusion of the provision for §
2255 damages in lieu of mandatory restitution. Setting aside items (a) through (e), if the
Department agreed with item (1) or if Epstein accepted USA Acosta 's invitation to "unwind" the
NPA and proceed to trial, we were faced with a target who had committed numerous identified
crimes and had unlimited resources to flee the jurisdiction. The investigative team wanted to be
prepared to arrest him as quickly as possible with the strongest criminal case at the ready. I also
believed that either the U.S. Attorney or someone at DOJ would stop allowing Epstein to use the
NPA as both a sword and a shield — attacking terms that Ken Starr had once thanked me for
recommending while keeping the USAO from indicting Epstein .
On December 12, 2007, Criminal Chief Senior and I finalized a revised indictment package
to present to the grand jury (Exhibit B-101). On January 7, 2008, I sent an email to my entire
advisory chain — up to the U.S. Attorney — laying out a series of steps in furtherance of the
investigation (Exhibit B-102). Next, I secured the assignment of a CEOS attorney, Myesha
Braden, as co-counsel, and she immediately traveled to West Palm Beach to participate in
interviews to familiarize herself with the case and to re-connect with the victims to prepare them
for potential trial testimony (Exhibits B-103, B-104). On January 14, 2008, Ms. Braden and I went
over charging and investigative strategy, as well as her next trip to West Palm Beach (Exhibit B-
105). I also asked the agents to compile the evidence so that it would be more manageable for
Page 49 of 58
Chief Senior's ongoing indictment review (Exhibit B-106). Ms. Braden, the agents, and I
continued working on the best way to charge the case, and collecting evidence to corroborate
witness statements (see Exhibit B-107). On January 31, 2008, another group of grand jury
subpoenas was prepared and served (Exhibit B-108). On January 31 and February 1, 2008, Ms.
Braden, the agents and I re-interviewed a series of victims (Exhibit B-109). As you can see from
Exhibit B-109, it wasn't simply the agents and I who thought that the investigation was ongoing,
the supervisory chain (up to and including the U.S. Attorney and the Chief of CEOS ) was aware
that: (1) victim and witness interviews were occurring; (2) grand jury subpoenas were being issued;
and (3) an indictment package was being revised and reviewed.
In February 2008, I was focused on working with the agents and Ms. Braden to finalize a
revised indictment package and having it reviewed and signed by my supervisors (Exhibit B-110).
On February 20, 2008, I sent an email to USA Acosta , FAUSA Sloman, CEOS Chief Oosterbaan,
Criminal Chief Senior, and others in the supervisory chain letting them know that I had provided
the final indictment package to my immediate supervisor the previous day (Exhibit B-I 11). I also
informed Ms. Braden that I reserved time with the grand jury on March 11, 2008 and asked her to
attend on that date (id). On February 25, 2008, I conferred with my immediate supervisor and
with one of our Senior Litigation Counsel, who also was one of our Professional Responsibility
Officers, about whether there was any reason to re-present the case to a different grand jury
(Exhibit B-112). I provided the result of my inquiry to FAUSA Sloman, Criminal Chief Senior,
the West Palm Beach supervisors, and Ms. Braden (Exhibit B-113). My supervisor completed her
review the following day (see Exhibit B-114).
Also on February 26, 2008, FAUSA Sloman informed me that he had told attorney Jay
Lefkowitz that, if CEOS rejected Epstein 's position, Epstein would be allowed "one week to abide
by the terms and conditions of the September 24, 2007 Agreement" (Exhibit B-115). I wrote to
FAUSA Sloman telling him that I could not understand why Epstein would be allowed to plead to
the same terms in light of Epstein 's false allegations and in light of the new evidence we had
uncovered, including six confirmed additional victims and three potential new victims in New
York (id.). I don't recall receiving any response.
Despite that communication to Epstein 's counsel, the Office continued towards indictment.
On February 27 and 28, 2008, FAUSA Sloman, Criminal Chief Senior, Civil Rights Chief
Weinstein, and I communicated about the USAM requirement that DOJ 's Civil Rights Section be
consulted when violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1591 are included in an indictment (Exhibit B-116). I
continued reviewing records received in response to grand jury subpoenas and the agents continued
working towards identifying additional witnesses and victims (Exhibit B-117). The following day,
I advised the same gentlemen about identifying another New York witness /potential victim and
her upcoming planned interview and inquired about the status of CEOS ' review (Exhibit B-118).
In March 2008, there were several developments in the investigation. The case agent and
I decided to present search warrants for memory cards that the Palm Beach Police Department had
collected. They had been reviewed by the PBPD near the time they were collected and no images
of child pornography had been seen, but a forensic examiner had recently opined that forensic
examination might result in the recovery of deleted images. I advised that a new forensic
examination would require search warrants , so they were prepared and executed (Exhibits B-119,
B-120).
Page 50 of 58
On March 5, 2008, I updated the Office supervisory chain and CEOS Chief Oosterbaan on
a number of case developments (Exhibit B-121). In that email, I noted that, if we were not going
to proceed, we needed to be mindful of the state statute of limitations, to allow the PBPD to present
charges to the Palm Beach State Attorney 's Office (id). I also reported on the status of indictment
review and my plan to start presenting to the grand jury on March 18, 2008, so that the grand jury
would have sufficient time to hear all of the evidence and reflect on it before voting on an
indictment (id.). On March 14, 2008, the head of the West Palm Beach office completed his review
of the indictment package and it was forwarded to Criminal Chief Senior for final review and
approval (Exhibits B-25, B-122). On March 18, 2008, I began my grand jury presentation (Exhibit
B-26). The planned continued presentation to the grand jury was postponed while we awaited
CEOS ' review. I expressed my concerns about the impact on the ongoing investigation (Exhibit
B-124).
In mid-May, 2008, CEOS completed its review, finding that a federal prosecution of
Epstein 's conduct was factually and legally sound (Exhibit B-24). The agents and I immediately
prepared to go back to the grand jury (Exhibit B-125). My supervisors also immediately prepared
to review and finalize an indictment incorporating the results of the continued investigation
(Exhibit B-38). The agents continued locating and interviewing more victims (see, e.g., Exhibit
B-126). When DAG Filip agreed to consider Epstein 's challenges, the planned grand jury
presentation was canceled (Exhibit 8-40).
Even after that delay, the agents and I pressed on. In June 2008, even as I was assisting
with the USAO 's submissions to DAG Filip (Exhibits B-123, B-127, and B-128), the agents and I
were working on additional grand jury subpoenas and obtaining 6001 immunity for a witness
(Exhibit B-129). On June 17, 2008, I applied for, and received permission to seek DOJ approval
for 6001 immunity (Exhibit 8-130). On June 24, DAAG Mandelker's designee granted the
application (Exhibit B-131). I also received permission to travel to New York with the agents to
conduct additional witness interviews (B-132). Time with the grand jury was scheduled and the
supervisory chain was informed of those plans as well as the status of the application for 6001
immunity (Exhibit B-133). I also was corresponding with counsel for the witness about her travel
for the grand jury appearance, which was scheduled for July I, 2008 (Exhibit B-I 34). Even when
the witness ' attorney told me that Epstein would be pleading guilty on June 30, 2008, I would not
release the witness (id). I formally withdrew the subpoena on June 30, 2008, following Jeffrey
Epstein 's entry of his guilty plea in state court (Exhibit B-135).
These activities took us up to the time of Jeffrey Epstein 's June 30, 2008 guilty plea. From
September 2007 until the end of June 2008, the agents and I: collected additional evidence;
reviewed that evidence; interviewed new victims and witnesses ; re-interviewed previously
identified victims and witnesses ; identified new crimes and charges; developed new charging
strategies; drafted supplemental pros memos; revised the indictment package; and presented new
evidence and testimony to the grand jury . Although I did not know that Victim-Witness Specialist
Smith's letters contained the language that the Epstein case was "currently under investigation,"
from my perspective, that language was absolutely true and, despite being fully advised of our
ongoing investigative activities, no one in my supervisory chain ever told me that the case was not
under investigation.
Page 51 of 58
C. General
1. As to all of the foregoing matters, identify any disagreements or concerns
expressed by government personnel as to these matters, the parties involved,
how the disagreements were resolved, and any concerns you had about any
such resolution and the individuals, if any, with whom you discussed your
concerns.
I raised a multitude of concerns during the investigation, negotiations, and enforcement
periods. They ranged from the explicit — my July 2007 email exchange with Matt Menchel about
his violations of the USAM, CVRA , and Ashcroft Memo (Exhibit 3) — to the subtle — repeated
requests to just meet with the victims. Here is one especially poignant request from January 31,
2008:
Hi Jeff and Alex - We just finished interviewing three of the girls . I wish you could
have been there to see how much this has affected them.
One girl broke down sobbing so that we had to stop the interview twice within a 20
minute span. She regained her composure enough to continue a short time, but she
said that she was having nightmares about Epstein coming after her and she started
to break down again, so we stopped the interview.
The second girl , who has a baby girl of her own, told us that she was very upset
about the 18 month deal she had read about in the paper. She said that 18 months
was nothing and that she had heard that the girls could get restitution, but she would
rather not get any money and have Epstein spend a significant time in jail.
The FBI 's victim-witness coordinator attended and she has arranged for counseling
for several of the girls .
Please reach out to Alice to make her decision. These girls deserve so much better
than they have received so far, and I hate feeling that there is nothing I can do to
help them.
We have four more girls coming in tomorrow. Can I persuade you to attend?
(Exhibit C-1.)
Many of the disagreements have been catalogued above, but I will try to collect them into
general categories in chronological order.
a. I did not want to meet with counsel for Epstein (Lilly Ann Sanchez and Gerald Lefcourt )
prior to completing my investigation. My co-counsel (John McMillan) agreed with me.
Our supervisor, Andrew Lourie, overruled us.
b. AUSA McMillan and I did not want to have a subsequent meeting with another set of
attorneys for Epstein , including Lilly Ann Sanchez , Gerald Lefcourt , Alan Dershowitz , and
Roy Black , that would also include Criminal Chief Matt Menchel . Over my objections,
Mr. Menchel also instructed me to provide defense counsel with a list of the federal statutes
that we had under consideration. Mr. Menchel asked me to provide all of my evidence to
the defense and only withdrew that instruction when I reminded him that federal statutes
Page 52 of 58
protected child victims' identities. I told my supervisor, Karen Atkinson, my concerns and
that I thought I should ask to have the case reassigned, and she counseled against it (Exhibit
C-4).
c. Ms. Atkinson, the agents, and I all tried to impress upon the others that, due to the nature
of the crimes under investigation, time was of the essence — Epstein was accused of
committing sexual offenses against dozens of minor girls . Our expert witness , as well as
our own experience, led us to believe that Epstein would not cease his criminal behavior
voluntarily. We also knew that Epstein was continuing to travel extensively using his
private airplanes, and that he would have the ability to flee to a jurisdiction that did not
extradite if he knew that charges were coming. At one point in May 2007, after the
indictment had been reviewed on several levels, we knew where Epstein would be and I
asked to arrest him on a criminal complaint. Criminal Chief Menchel responded that he
was "having trouble understanding — given how long this case has been pending — what the
rush is." (Exhibit C-5). There was another instance a month or two later where we knew
that Epstein was traveling to serve as a judge for a beauty contest and I again asked for
permission to prepare a criminal complaint. Criminal Chief Menchel 's denial of the
request was even more emphatic.
d. In July 2007, Mr. Menchel and I exchanged strong words when he reported that he had
engaged in plea negotiations without the input or knowledge of the agents, victims, or
myself (Exhibit 3). My objections included:
i. The failure to meet and consult with the victims, agents, and me before
deciding what plea offer to extend.
ii. Offering a plea to a state offense. There was never any explanation of why
a federal investigation would be resolved with a state plea, and I understood
that a state plea would remove all control over the plea and sentencing
procedure.
iii. Starting the negotiations at only 24 months' imprisonment, which was
unreasonably low and not in keeping with any of the federal crimes under
investigation.07
iv. Sending the message to defense counsel that plea negotiations would be
handled by the executive division rather than the line prosecutor and the
West Palm Beach supervisory team.
e. From the beginning of the federal investigation, the agents and I had pushed to get the
computer equipment that Epstein had removed from his home prior to the execution of the
state search warrant. When Epstein 's counsel had stated that Epstein wanted to
"cooperate" with the federal investigation, we asked that they turn it over voluntarily; they
never did. We sought it via grand jury subpoena and they moved to quash the subpoena.
Every time the matter was set for a hearing, Epstein 's counsel would ask the Office to agree
47 Mr. Menchel 's responsive email in July 2007, suggested that, in light of the statement
by Ms. Sanchez that 24 months' imprisonment was a "non-starter," we would be able to re-set plea
negotiations at a higher number, but that never happened.
Page 53 of 58
g.
to "continue" the hearing pending our "plea negotiations." I repeatedly recommended
moving forward on the computer equipment because it was obvious that they did not want
to turn it over and the equipment likely contained hard evidence of travel, contact with
victims, obstruction of justice, and possibly child pornography offenses. Instead, the
Office continuously agreed to put off the hearing and even when Epstein 's attorneys tried
to use the existence of the pending motion to quash as a basis to stay some of the victims'
civil suits.
f. Once I was informed that I had to devise a plea agreement with a sentencing cap of 24
months' imprisonment, I drafted a plea to a conspiracy to violate 18 U.S.C. § 2422, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 — one of the crimes that had been the subject of the
investigation and that was included in the indictment. That crime was a felony with a five-
year statutory maximum, and the guidelines would have exceeded the five-year max, so
the plea agreement would have had to be a binding plea pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P.
11(c)(1)(C), which is what I drafted. I was informed by Mr. Lourie that USA Acosta did
not want to do a (c)(1)(C) plea, so I had to find charges that would result in a two-year
statutory maximum. This resulted in me having to research misdemeanors and find facts
that would fit those misdemeanors. I thought it was totally inappropriate. Luckily, Andy
Lourie finally stepped in and told Lefkowitz that we would not agree to a misdemeanor
charge unrelated to the crimes that we had investigated.
Throughout the drafting of the NPA , every time Jay Lefkowitz and I reached an impasse,
he and/or Ken Starr would appeal to Andy Lourie, Jeff Sloman, or Alex Acosta , making it
impossible to hold a firm line or keep a singular negotiating strategy. I tried to work from
the Office's standard plea agreement language, but even after language was agreed to, it
would be rewritten by Mr. Acosta .
i. I strenuously objected to the reduction of the prison term from 24 months
to 18 months.
ii. I objected to the clear efforts at delay for no reason other than delay (for
example, going back and forth from a federal plea to a state plea and back
to a federal plea — all the while asking me to provide copious drafts).
iii. At various points, it was apparent that Epstein was not engaging in good
faith plea negotiations and I asked to terminate the negotiations and proceed
to indictment. Every time, Mr. Acosta refused. For example, near the end
of the negotiations, Mr. Lefkowitz tried to "slip in" a citation to a different
state crime that did not require sex offender registration. When I brought
this to Mr. Leflcowitz's attention, he admitted that, despite their explicit
agreement that Mr. Epstein would plead guilty to a crime that required sex
offender registration, they originally believed that the crimes listed in the
NPA did not require registration. When they realized their error — and the
Epstein would, indeed, have to register, they tried to replace the statute with
a different one. This was the clearest example of bad faith amongst many,
yet I was told that I had to continue working with Mr. Lefkowitz to finalize
the agreement. USA Acosta told me that he did not want to punish Epstein
for the bad behavior of his attorneys — even though Epstein clearly was
directing every aspect of his defense.
Page 54 of 58
J.
iv. I told FAUSA Sloman and USA Acosta that I did not want to sign the NPA
because I did not think that it was "my" agreement. USA Acosta asked me
to sign it.
h. After the NPA was signed, USA Acosta continued to concede points that had already been
decided. For example, he agreed to the preparation of the Addendum. He then made a
number of concessions regarding the letter to the Special Master, including a statement that
we would not vouch for the veracity of the victims, despite the fact that these were victims
that we intended to include in an indictment. These were all areas that were the subject of
a signed, binding agreement. On October 5, 2007, and October 23, 2007, I against asked
for permission to proceed to indictment (Exhibits C-6, C-7).
i. After the Addendum was signed, USA Acosta wrote in the 12/19/2007 letter to Lilly Ann
Sanchez that he had "considered defense counsel arguments regarding the Section 2255
portions of the Agreement. ... During the course of negotiations [our] intent was reduced
to writing in Paragraphs 7 and 8, which as I wrote previously, appear far from simple to
understand." (Exhibit B-19). I raised concerns about undermining an Agreement entered
into by our Office and giving away one of the protections that had been negotiated for the
victims — representation by an attorney selected by the Special Master.
I raised concerns about delays in entering Epstein 's guilty plea and sentencing. These were
portrayed as "professional courtesies" but it quickly became obvious that the NPA was
signed with no intention of actual performance — it was simply a way for Epstein to buy
time to avoid indictment and intimidate victims.
k. I raised objections to the multiple "appeals" to DC and the delays that those entailed. USA
Acosta explained that "every defendant" has the right to appeal to DC and raise federalism
concerns. I explained that the objections should have been raised prior to signing the NPA ,
not after, and, if they were legitimate "policy questions," Epstein should agree that he
would not use the time to harass and intimidate victims.
1. As detailed above, after the NPA was signed, the agents and I repeatedly raised concerns
about the Office's deference to the defense's objections to providing notification to the
victims of the resolution of the investigation and the date and time of the Epstein 's plea
and sentencing.
m. On February 26, 2008, I learned that, if CEOS conducted its review and concluded the
federal prosecution of Epstein was appropriate, the Office was going to allow Epstein to
plead guilty pursuant to the NPA with no additional terms or conditions, despite the fact
that additional victims had been located during the ongoing investigation. I wrote to
FAUSA Sloman and expressed my view that this was an unjust result (Exhibit B-115). I
re-raised this objection every time the Office allowed Epstein another opportunity to
maintain the benefits of the NPA even as he was attacking the NPA 's legitimacy.
n. On March 19, 2008, I informed the supervisory chain up to FAUSA Sloman of the toll that
the delay was taking on the victims and the grand jury . In particular, one of the grand
jurors had told another that he was concerned that we were going to "whitewash" the case
and not charge it. Epstein was using the delay to harass the victims, and one of the victims
tried to commit suicide . I wrote how the "FBI 's victim-witness coordinator is doing her
Page 55 of 58
best to get counseling for all of our needy victims, but I just can't stress enough how
important it is for these girls to have a resolution in this case. The `please be patient'
answer is really wearing thin, especially when Epstein 's group is still on the attack while
we are forced to wait on the sidelines. Your guidance is needed." (Exhibit C-2) I followed
up on March 19 and 22, 2008 to let everyone know that Epstein was subpoenaing victims
and was using particularly aggressive means of service — having the Sheriff's Office serve
the subpoenas at the places of work, calling them into the Dean's Office at their colleges,
etc. I explained that Epstein was issuing these subpoenas in the context of the state criminal
case — even though these victims were not named victims in the state criminal case, and I
asked FAUSA Sloman to try to have Epstein 's attorneys stop this contact as it was
inconsistent with Epstein 's alleged interest in resolving the matter (Exhibit C-3). I do not
believe that anyone contacted Epstein 's attorneys about this. I worked to secure pro bono
counsel for as many victims as possible so that Epstein would only be able to contact them
through counsel (id.). My concerns about the victims' mental health were brought to the
attention of management in emails and telephone calls throughout the entire period from
2006 through 2008 and probably into 2009.
o. Even after Epstein enter his guilty plea and was sentenced, there were a number of material
breaches. Every time I tried to enforce the agreement and enforce the Office's authority to
proceed to indictment, the Office would accept Epstein 's excuse that he received "bad
advice" from his attorneys and then he would "cure" the breach. With regard to the work
release, either Roy Black or Jay Lefkowitz informed me that USA Acosta had agreed, after
the NPA was signed, that Epstein would be allowed to participate in work release like any
other state prisoner — in direct contravention of discussions and communications that Karen
Atkinson and I had with the defense. I was not allowed to invoke this as a breach.
2. Identify any occasion during which you were or felt pressured, intimidated,
threatened, coerced, or in any other manner inappropriately influenced to
take a position or action in the Epstein case with which you disagreed or which
caused you concern, and the individuals, if any, with whom you discussed such
concerns.
Throughout this memo, I have listed a number of disagreements. In broad categories, I
disagreed with: (1) meeting with defense counsel before the investigation was completed and
disclosing to them our charging strategy; (2) members of the Executive Division engaging in plea
and strategy discussions outside the presence of the prosecution team and encouraging defense
counsel to avoid the prosecution team; (3) entering into pre-indictment plea negotiations; (4)
agreeing to delay the litigation regarding Epstein 's computer equipment while pursuing plea
negotiations; (5) entering into an agreement deferring federal prosecution; (6) entering into any
agreement that required a sentence of only 18 months' (or even 24 months') imprisonment; (7)
agreeing to a length of a sentence and then trying to find a charge with a statutory max to match;
(8) reaching an agreement without conferring with the victims, the agents, or even the prosecution
team; (9) refusing to hear from/meet with the victims even after meeting repeatedly with Epstein 's
representatives; (10) during the drafting of the NPA , allowing Epstein 's attorneys to complain
directing to the First Assistant and U.S. Attorney when they were dissatisfied with answers from
the line AUSA and West Palm Beach supervisors; (11) repeatedly overruling my efforts to hold
Epstein to the original terms, including reducing the term of imprisonment from 24 months down
to 18; (12) dismissing my repeated warnings that the attorneys were not negotiating in good faith
Page 56 of 58
and were delaying for strategic reasons; (13) repeatedly ceding our discretion to the defense, for
example, agreeing that they could review and comment on victim notification letters and decide
whether or not we could provide notice; (14) even after the NPA was signed, continuing to water
it down, with the Addendum, the 12/19/07 Acosta letter, and then later offering Epstein the option
of not having to provide the attorney-representative for the victims; (15) refusing to allow the
agents and Ito notify the victims about the terms of the NPA and about the change of plea; (16)
allowing Epstein to continue to enjoy the benefits of the NPA even after he failed to promptly
perform its terms and filed specious delays in order to try to negotiate better terms or win a battle
of attrition; (17) refusing to defend me from the false allegations of prosecutorial misconduct; (18)
refusing to step in and protect the victims from harassment from Epstein 's attorneys when Epstein
was "appealing" to DC; and (19) allowing Epstein to repeatedly breach the NPA and then claim
that he just got bad advice from his lawyers and "cure" the breaches.
At various times during the investigation, negotiations, etc., I spoke with a number of
people about my disagreements with the Office, including my supervisor, Karen Atkinson, my co-
counsel, John McMillan, Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards, AUSAs Lynn Kirkpatrick,
Susan Roe, E.J. Yera, and DOJ Trial Attorneys Tammie Gregg and Myesha Braden. On several
occasions, I drafted emails about re-assigning the case because the Office's handling of the matter
was so contrary to my methods. I shared at least one of these with Ms. Atkinson (Exhibit C-4).
She counseled against sending it. The agents asked me not to leave the case because they believed
that, if I left, the case would simply disappear. I couldn't disagree with them.
Criminal Chief Menchel 's response to my email in July 2007 was, in my mind,
inappropriate and meant to intimidate. It is, quite frankly, unheard of, for a Criminal Chief to
engage in plea negotiations without the line AUSA's knowledge, much less blessing. And the
offer that was made was inexplicable. To this day, I do not understand the NPA — 24 months/18
months — it is a completely random amount of time. Allowing a federal defendant to plead guilty
to state charges also is completely unheard of. No one has ever explained to me where the idea
originated from. For Mr. Menchel to suggest that my judgment was questionable or that I was
unable to handle "major" cases was obviously meant to "put me in my place." In my July 13, 2007
response to Mr. Menchel , I wrote:
With respect to your questions regarding my judgment, I will simply say that
disagreements about strategy and raising concerns about the forgotten voices of the
victims in this case should not be classified as a lapse in judgment. This Office
should seek to foster spirited debate about the law and the use of prosecutorial
discretion. I know of other instances where disagreements about the application of
the law to different defendants and defense attorneys has resulted in a call for the
resignation of the AUSA who dared to challenge the Executive Office's
conclusions. I find that very disheartening. However, my first and only concern in
this case (and my other child exploitation cases) is the victims. If our personality
differences threaten their access to justice, then please put someone on the case
whom you trust more, and who will also protect their rights.
After my response to Mr. Menchel , I know that he spoke with Anne Ruth Schultz, who
was Chief of Appeals at the time, about moving me to the Appellate Section.
The results of the disagreements catalogued above were communicated to me (orally or via
e-mail) as decisions of the Executive Division. They sometimes followed extensive debate. They
Page 57 of 58
sometimes followed no debate. I was sometimes heard on the issue; other times I knew nothing
about it until I received the directive. There were times that I learned of communications between
defense counsel and the Executive Division where concessions were made only after the decision
was made. Many of these decisions were incorrect, in my opinion, but I did not believe that they
were illegal. As a line AUSA, I was duty bound to follow the directives of the U.S. Attorney ,
which I did. I do not know that following a direct order from the Executive Division would qualify
as coercion — even if it follows very strong objections.
I felt strongly that we should have conferred with the victims before entering into the NPA
and that we should have informed them of the change of plea and sentencing. I felt strongly that
Epstein 's attorneys were given unprecedented access to members of the Executive Division, and
that the victims were given no access -- I could not even talk with them about plea negotiations or
notify them about the plea hearing. At one point, my assistant and I had letters and envelopes
ready to be stuffed and put through the franking machine and we received notice from Miami that
they could not go out. While I felt that conferring was the right thing to do, as noted above, the
AG Guidelines vest discretion in the U.S. Attorney , so I could not say that USA Acosta 's decision
was illegal. I also believed that, because the resolution of the federal case rested on Epstein 's state
guilty plea, the federal victims were entitled to notice of the state hearing. But I could not say that
USA Acosta 's decision that the CVRA was limited to notice of federal proceedings was illegal.
I think that pressure was brought in more subtle ways. For example, I believe that one of
the reasons why USA Acosta did not take an aggressive stance against the prosecutorial
misconduct claims against me was because he disliked my insistence on pushing the case forward.
After the NPA was signed, USA Acosta recommended that I transfer to the Civil Division.
I agreed to meet with them and talk about their work. Despite USA Acosta 's recommendation, I
decided not to follow his recommendation, and I stayed in the criminal division .
Please advise if further information is needed.
Sincerely,
dal Marta rilliskrages.
A. Marie Villafaila
Page 58 of 58
BAKER,DONELSON 100 116111 STREET • BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21202 • 410.685.1120. bakerdonelson.com
JONATHAN BRAN
Direct Dial: 410.862.1073
E-Mail AddresallkitAN@bakerdonelson.com
May 10, 2019
VIA EMAIL °N4"
Laura Ingersoll
Counsel, Office of Professional Responsibility
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. — Room 3266
Washington , D.C. 20530
Re: OPR Investigation Relating to Jeffrey Epstein Federal Criminal Investigation
Dear Ms. Ingersoll:
Attached please find the written response of Assistant United States Attorney A. Marie
Villafafia to the letter of Jeffrey R. Ragsdale, dated April 2, 2019, regarding the criminal
investigation of Jeffrey Epstein . AUSA Villafafia separately has sent you encrypted disks
containing the exhibits referenced in her written response, and has emailed other exhibits that
were not included on the disks.
Mr. Ragsdale's letter also requested background information concerning AUSA
Villafafia's professional background and experience. The remainder of this letter provides that
information.
A native of Minnesota , A. Marie Villafafia graduated from Cornell University and the
University of California , Berkeley , School of Law. She was admitted to the California Bar in
1995, to the Minnesota Bar in 1997, and to the Florida Bar in 2005. She is currently an active
member of the Florida Bar, and maintains inactive status in California and Minnesota .
Ms. Villafafia began her legal career as a judicial law clerk to the Honorable David F.
Levi, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of California , from 1993 to 1994. Ms.
Villafafia then worked in private practice for seven years, including as a litigation associate at
Morrison & Foerster in San Francisco and a trial associate with Dorsey & Whitney, LLP, in
Minneapolis, Minnesota , and London , England . Ms. Villafafia remained in civil practice,
specializing in intellectual property litigation until 2001, when she was hired by the United
States Attorney 's Office in Miami .
While she enjoyed civil practice, Ms. Villafafia for many years had wanted to be an
Assistant United States Attorney . Two early career mentors — Judge Levi and Portia Moore from
Morrison & Foerster — had worked at U.S. Attorney 's Offices and they, like many former
4822.5464-M66vI
2865555.000127 05/102019
ALABAMA • FLORIDA • GEORGiA • LOUISIANA • MARYLAND • M1SS!SSIPPI• SOUTH CAROLINA • TENNESSEE • TEXAS • VIRGINIA • WASHINGTON , D.C.
Laura Ingersoll
May 10, 2019
Page 2 of 7
AUSAs, described the job as the best of their careers. Ms. Villafafia also wanted to serve her
community. She was in the first generation of her family to graduate from college. She is the
only member of her family to get an advanced degree. Personal experiences left her deeply
committed to wanting to create safer communities for victims of crime. After several years of
waiting for an opening at the USAO in Minneapolis, when Ms. Villafafia's brother moved to the
West Palm Beach area, she applied for a position at the U.S. Attorney 's Office for the Southern
District of Florida .
On September 10, 2001, Ms. Villafafia began serving as an Assistant United States
Attorney in the Southern District of Florida . She did a rotation through the Appellate Section
and then joined the Major Crimes Section from late September 2001 until January 2004. While
in that unit, she handled reactive cases and short-term investigations and cases, including
narcotics , firearms, child exploitation offenses, immigration matters, credit card fraud , bank
robbery, violent offenses, and supervised release violations. While serving in that unit, she was
also selected as one of the Southern District of Florida 's first Project Safe Neighborhood
prosecutors .
In January 2004, AUSA Villafafia transferred to the West Palm Beach Office. In 2006,
the U.S. Department of Justice initiated Project Safe Childhood, and, in recognition of her
expertise in child exploitation matters, AUSA Villafalia became the Southern District of
Florida 's first Project Safe Childhood coordinator. From 2004 through early 2009, AUSA
Villafaha handled the bulk of the child exploitation cases in West Palm Beach , as well as other
cases involving violent crime, gangs, narcotics , firearms, immigration , and white collar matters.
In March 2009, AUSA Villafafia was selected as the first Chief of the Special
Prosecutions North Section, which was a new section in the Fort Lauderdale Office that would
work on Project Safe Childhood and Project Safe Neighborhood prosecutions. In late 2010,
when a new U.S. Attorney was sworn in, AUSA Villafafia asked that she be transferred back to
the West Palm Beach Office, because the daily commute to Fort Lauderdale was both taxing and
time consuming and it was exacerbating a then undiscovered medical condition from which she
was suffering.
Since 2010, AUSA Villafafia has been assigned to the West Palm Beach Office and is
now the liaison to the Greater Palm Beach County Health Care Fraud Task Force. Since
returning to West Palm Beach , AUSA Villafafia's caseload has shifted more towards economic
crimes, but she has worked on a wide array of cases including insurance fraud , varying types of
health care fraud , human trafficking , drug diversion, and bank fraud .
According to CourtLink, AUSA Villafafia was counsel of record in 445 criminal matters
in the Southern District of Florida . This number does not include all of the 2255 petition and
appeals AUSA Villafafia has handled, but does include search warrants and pen registers that she
sought. Of these approximately 445 cases, a number of matters are noteworthy:
4822.5464.6166x1
2865555.000127 05/10,2019
Laura Ingersoll
May 10, 2019
Page 3 of 7
As the Southern District of Florida 's first Project Safe Childhood Coordinator, she
personally handled dozens of child exploitation cases.
It appears from a review of Westlaw and Courtlink research, that AUSA Villafafia was
the first prosecutor in the Southern District of Florida to convince the court to recognize the
rights of a victim's family to appear and speak to the Court about the proper sentence:
• U.S.'. William Charles O'Neil, 04-Cr-80040
The victim's mother remains in touch with AUSA Villafafia to this day.
From Westlaw and Courtlink research, it appears that AUSA Villafafia was the first
prosecutor in the Southern District of Florida to advocate for the appointment of a guardian ad
litem for minor victims in connection with a criminal prosecution .
• U.S.'. Jimmy Oliver, 06-Cr-80023
• U.S.'. Marion Yarbrough, 07-Cr-80099
From Westlaw and Courtlink research, it appears that AUSA Villafafia was the first
prosecutor in the Southern District of Florida to charge enticement of a minor based upon use of
a cellular phone.
U.S.'. McDaniel, 06-Cr-80058
From Westlaw and Courtlink research, it appears that AUSA Villafafia was the first
prosecutor in the Southern District of Florida to charge a violation of the child pornography
advertising statute.
U.S.'. Frank Grasso, 05-Cr-80111
From Westlaw and Courtlink research, it appears that AUSA Villafafia was the first
prosecutor in the Southern District of Florida to charge failure to register as a sex offender.
AUSA Villafafia trained other prosecutors and agents on how to investigate and prosecute those
cases.
U.S.'. Alfonso Diaz Cardenas, 07-Cr-80108
AUSA Villafafia assisted in the drafting of Eleventh Circuit Pattern [Criminal ] Jury
Instructions related to child exploitation offenses, including clarifying that, in cases of actual
contact with a child, there is no requirement of proving the defendant's knowledge of age.
4822-54644166v1
2865555-000127 05/10/2019
Laura Ingersoll
May 10, 2019
Page 4 of 7
According to inquiries with DOJ 's Health Care Fraud Section, Ms. Villafaila was the first
prosecutor in the nation to charge sex trafficking in connection with a health care fraud case.
U.S.'.0 Kenneth Chatman, 17-Cr-80013 (subject of an American Greed episode,
CNBC , Season 12, Episode 10 "Florida Rehab Gone " July 2, 2018)
Chatman was the first of several cases to target fraud in connection with substance abuse
treatment. To date, AUSA Villafafia has convicted 30 individuals, including six licensed
medical or mental health professionals, for related offenses:
II U.S. . Kenneth Chatman, et al., 17-Cr-80013
O U.S. . Barry Gregory, 17-Cr-80033
I
fl U.S. . Richard Botero, et al., 17-Cr-80070
O U.S. . Tovah Lynn Jasperson, et al., 17-Cr-80194
U U.S.'. Jeffrey Williams, 17-Cr-80195
U U.S. . Albert Jones Saye, l7-Cr-80229
O U.S. . John Skeffington, et al., 18-Cr-80018
O U.S. . Anthony Jackson, 18-Cr-80040
U U.S. . Lanny Fried, 18-Cr-80100
O U.S.'. 13osco Vega, 18-Cr-80101
fl U.S.'. Mark Hollander, 18-Cr-80102
O U.S.'. Larry Weisberg, 18-Cr-80108
U U.S. I. Kenneth MI -Kolb, 18-Cr-80121 I
O U.S. . Arman Abovyan, et al., 18-Cr-80122
fl U.S.'. Hamilton Wayne, et al., 18-Cr-80165
O U.S.'. Ethan Wayne, 18-Cr-80168
The Chatman case resulted in AUSA Villafafia being awarded the 2018 Council of the
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency Award and the 2017 National Healthcare Anti-
Fraud Association Investigation of the Year Award. This series of investigations has been
nominated for this year's FBI Director's Award and the Florida Insurance Fraud Education
Committee's Award.
At the request of DOJ 's Office of Legislative Affairs, AUSA Villafafia has provided
advice on Congress' recent legislation on fraud involving sober homes and treatment facilities.
4822-5464-6166%1
2865555-000127 05/10/2019
Laura Ingersoll
May 10, 2019
Page 5 of 7
AUSA Villafafia's prosecution of a member of Guatemala 's Kaibil military branch led to
war crimes investigations and prosecutions of numerous high-ranking military and political
figures in Guatemalan and international courts, and resulted in her receipt of the Justice
Department 's 2011 National Crime Victims' Rights Service Award. The case was the subject of
an award-wining documentary entitled "Finding Oscar" and numerous television shows and
podcasts.
U.S.'. Gilberto Jordan, 10-Cr-80069
AUSA Villafafia prosecuted the leader and numerous members of the Krazy Locos street
gang in Palm Beach County (an MS-13 affiliate) for two murders in connection with
racketeering activity and numerous firearms, drug, and sex trafficking offenses.
U.S.'. Jonathan a, et al., 09-Cr-80091
U.S.'. Ivan Santiago, 09-Cr-80135
U.S.'. Itzel Candela-Campos, 10-Cr-80042
AUSA Villafafia prosecuted 57 individuals, including 21 medical professionals, for
charges related to staged accidents and chiropractic clinic fraud . According to information
received from victim insurance companies, the prosecutions resulted in a 50% decrease in
fraudulent auto insurance claims in Palm Beach County as well as changes to state legislation.
AUSA Villafafia received the Attorney General 's Award for Fraud Prevention and the [EOUSA]
Director's Award for this series of cases. She also received Prosecutor of the Year awards from
the Coalition Against Insurance Fraud and the Florida Insurance Fraud Education Committee for
her work in these cases.
• U.S.'. Vladimir Lopez, et al., 11-Cr-80106
• U.S.'. Ketty a, et al., 11-Cr-80211
• U.S.'. Obelio Rodriguez, et al., 12-Cr-80107
• U.S.'. Yuliet Tapanes, et al., 12-Cr-80108
• U.S.'. M Adams, 12-Cr-80112
• U.S.'. Iris Roca, 13-Cr-80109
• U.S.'. Olinda Rodriguez, 13-Cr-80110
AUSA Villafafia successfully handled the appeal in the matter of U.S.'. Damian Baston
(14-14444 (11th Circuit)), arguing for full restitution for victims of sex trafficking and for the
right of the United States to prosecute sex trafficking that occurred outside the United States but
originated in the United States.
4822-5464.6166v1
2865555-000127 05/10/2019
Laura Ingersoll
May 10, 2019
Page 6 of 7
From Westlaw and Courtlink research, it appears that AUSA Villafaha was the first
prosecutor in the Southern District of Florida to charge violations of the federal money
transmitting statute.
• U.S. 1 Nolaco-Argueta, 02-Cr-20465
Significant Sentences:
130 years' imprisonment for Jimmy Oliver, who had molested numerous female
family members over several decades. (06-Cr-80023)
• Life plus 135 years for Jonathan , head of the Krazy Locos gang, for
ordering two murders and an attempted murder in aid of racketeering and other
offenses (09-Cr-80091)
Life imprisonment plus 35 years for Manuel Medina for murder in aid of
racketeering and other offenses (09-Cr-80091)
40 years' imprisonment for Marion Yarbrough, who had enticed a Florida girl to
board a bus to Kentucky where he repeatedly abused her sexually (07-Cr-80099)
40 years' imprisonment for Mark Joseph Harvey, who was found in possession of
over 1 million images of child pornography , organized in files by age and subject
matter, and who had previously sexually abused family members (09-Cr-80023)
• 30 years' imprisonment for Ivan Isidro Santiago, co-head of the Krazy Locos
gang, for his role in two murders and an attempted murder in aid of racketeering
and other offenses (09-Cr-80091 and 09-Cr-80135)
27.5 years for Kenneth Chatman, who had forced female patients of his substance
abuse treatment program into prostitution (17-Cr-80013)
• 25 years for Frank Grasso, who used social media to advertise for child
pornography (05-Cr-80111)
• 20 years for Jonathan Earl Clark on charges of enticement of a minor and child
pornography (08-Cr-80067)
• 20 years for Eric Runyan on charges of distribution of obscenity to a minor and
enticement (12-Cr-80115)
• 19 years for Alejandro Tomas for aiding and abetting murder in aid of
racketeering (09-Cr-80091)
• 15 years for Christopher -Chamberlain on a charge of aggravated assault
in connection with the Krazy ocos case (09-Cr-80091)
• 14 years for Lucas Phelps on charges of enticement of a minor and transmission
of obscene material to a child. Phelps had previously been adjudicated delinquent
on three counts of sexual battery. (05-Cr-80020)
4822-54644166A
2865555-000127 O5/102019
Laura Ingersoll
May 10, 2019
Page 7 of 7
• 12 years for John Walsh on charges of distribution of child pornography (05-Cr-
80185)
• 11 years for Silverio Macedonio-Gregorio for aiding and abetting murder in aid of
racketeering and other offenses (09-Cr-80091)
• 10 years for Thomas Bohannon on charges of enticement of a minor (05-Cr-
80023)
• 10 years for Gilberto Jordan on charges of false statements on immigration
application for failing to disclose his involvement in war crimes in Guatemala
(10-Cr-80069)
• 8 years for Christopher Prindle for possession of child pornography (04-Cr-
80156)
If you have any questions about any of the above information and the information
included AUSA Villafafia's attached letter, please contact me at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN,
CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, PC
/s/
Jonathan Biran
JB/smr
Enclosures/Attachment
cc: AUSA A. Marie Villafafia
4822.5464-0166x1
2865555-000127 05/10/2019
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (56!) 820-8777
July 10, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
THEODORE J. LEOPOLD, ESQ.
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM
Jutx 10, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 2
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider thatit is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
St ough this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client,
is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim o. an
enumerated offense.
Should your client decide to file a claim against Jeffrey Epstein , his attorney, Jack
Goldberger , asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, 250 Australian
Avenue South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach , FL 33401.
Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney 's Office nor the Federal Bureau of
Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation ; however, if you do file a
claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an
enumerated offense, please provide written documentation of that denial to the undersigned.
Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this investigation
and express the heartfelt regards of m self and Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards for
the health and well-being of Ms.
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:
cc: Jack Goldberger , Esq.
...••••••••
. MARIE VELLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561)8204711
Facsimile: (56!) 8204777
July 10, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL
Theodore J. Leopold, Esq.
Ricci—Leopold, P.A.
2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 200
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
Re: Jeffrey Epstein /Saige Gonzalez : NOTIFICATION OF
IDENTIFIED VICTIM.
Dear Mr. Leopold:
• By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney 's Office for the Southern District
of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client,
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach CoUnty (Case Nos. 2006-d-009454/OOOOAB and 2008-cf-
009381AXXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of
Community Control 1, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
U.S. Department of Justice FILE COPY i
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
.14.•411 Mr.
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 10, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
JEFFREY HERMAN, ESQ.
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM ANGELIQUE GARCIA (NEE CAVALLARO)
JULY 10, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 2
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client,
), is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as a
victim of an enumerated offense.
Should your client decide to file a claim against Jeffrey Epstein , his attorney, Jack
Goldberger , asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, 250 Australian
Avenue South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach , FL 33401.
Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney 's Office nor the Federal Bureau of
Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation ; however, if you do file a
claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an
enumerated offense, please provide written documentation of that denial to the undersigned.
Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this investigation
and express the heartfelt regards of myself and Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards for
the health and well-being of Ms. Garcia.
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By: C/ "Z.
A. MARIE VILLAFANA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
cc: Jack Goldberger , Esq.
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave.. Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561)820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 10, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL
Jeffrey Herman, Esq.
Herman & Mermelstein, P.A.
18205 Biscayne Boulevard
Suite 2218
Miami , Florida 33160
Re: Jeffrey Epstein /Angelique Garcia (née Cavatiara):
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM
Dear Mr. Herman:
By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney 's Office for the Southern District
of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client, Garcia.
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB and 2008-cf-
009381AXX3CMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of
Community Control 1, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Bohn Beach, FL 33401
(561)820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 10, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
RICHARD WILLITS, ESQ.
NCYFIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM ANDRIANO
JULY 10, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 2
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client,
is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an
enumerated offense.
Should your client decide to file a claim against Jeffrey Epstein , his attorney, Jack
Goldberger , asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, 250 Australian
Avenue South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach , FL 33401.
Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney 's Office nor the Federal Bureau of
Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation ; however, if you do file a
claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an
enumerated offense, please provide written documentation of that denial to the undersigned.
Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this investigation
and express the heartfelt regards of m self and Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards for
the health and well-being of Ms.
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:
A. MARIE V1LLAFAN- A
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
cc: Jack Goldberger , Esq.
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney '
Southern District of Florida
.500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561)820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 10, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL
Richard H. Willits, P.A.
2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404
Lake Worth, FL 33461
Re: Jeffrey Epstein /Carolyn NOTIFICATION OF
IDENTIFIED VICTIM
Dear Mr. Willits:
By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney 's Office for the Southern District
of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client,
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454/OOaMB and 2008-cf-
009381AXXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of
Community Control 1, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
•
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
Jply.10, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
EXHIBIT B-67
BRAD EDWARD$, ESQ.
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM
JULY 9, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 2
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less." •
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client,
is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an enumerated
offense.
Should your client decide to file a claim against Jeffrey Epstein , his attorney, Jack
Goldberger , asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, 250 Australian
Avenue South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach , FL 33401, (561) 659-8300 .
Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney 's Office nor the Federal Bureau of
Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation ; however, if you do file a
claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an
enumerated offense, please provide notice of that denial to the undersigned.
Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this examination
and express the heartfelt regards ofAlself and Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards for
the health and well-being of Ms. M.
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
cc: Jack Goldberger , Esq.
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 9, 2008 .
VIA FACSIMILE
Brad Edwards , Esq.
The Law Offices of Brad Edwards & Associates, LLC
2028 Harrison Street, Suite 202
Hollywood, Florida 33020.
Re: Jeffrey Epstein /Courtney NOTIFICATION OF
IDENTIFIED VICTIM
Dear Mr. Edwards:
By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney 's Office for the Southern District
of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client,
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454A=MB and 2008-cf-
009381AXXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of
Community Control 1, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
U.S. Department of Justice FILE COPY
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 9, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
BRAD EDWARDS , ESQ.
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM a RIVERA
JULY 9, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 2
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that your client,
M , is an individual whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an
enumerated offense.
Should your client decide to file a claim against Jeffrey Epstein , his attorney, Jack
Goldberger , asks that you contact him at Atterbury Goldberger and Weiss, 250 Australian
Avenue South, Suite 1400, West Palm Beach , FL 33401, (561) 659-8300 .
Please understand that neither the U.S. Attorney 's Office nor the Federal Bureau of
Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist in civil litigation ; however, if you do file a
claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 and Mr. Epstein denies that your client is a victim of an
enumerated offense, please provide notice of that denial to the undersigned.
Please thank your client for all of her assistance during the course of this examination
and express the heartfelt regards of m self and Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards for
the health and well-being of Ms.
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:
cc: Jack Goldberger , Esq.
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561)820-8711
Facsimile: (561)820-8777
July 9, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE
Brad Edwards , Esq.
The Law Offices of Brad Edwards & Associates, LLC
2028 Harrison Street, Suite 202
Hollywood, Florida 33020.
Re: Jeffrey EpsteinMIM NOTIFICATION OF
IDENTIFIED VICTIM
Dear Mr. Edwards:
By virtue of this letter, the United States Attorney 's Office for the Southern District
of Florida asks that you provide the following notice to your client,
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation ofprostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-ef-009454AXXXMB and 2008-cf-
00938 1 AXXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of
Community Control 1, with conditions of community confinement imposed by the Court.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to whichEpstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 9, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIM
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
EXHIBIT B-66
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 5;15 PM
To: Villafana , Ann Mane C. (USAFLS ); Acosta . Alex (USAFLS ): Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Cc: Kuyrkendall, E N. (FBI ); Richards, Jason R. (FBI )
Subject: Re: Proposed response to Goldberger 's letter
Fine
Original Message
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS ); Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Cc: Kuyrkendall, E N. (FBI ); Richards, Jason R. (FBI )
Sent: Thu Jul 10 17:12:26 2008
Subject: Proposed response to Goldberger 's letter
Please let me know if this is alright to fax out today. I can see no reason for
us to disclose any of the additional information that they have requested.
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments:
080710 Response to Goldberger ltr re notification.wpd
Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or
receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings
to determine how attachments are handled.
EXHIBIT 8-65 543
indicated in your letter of December 13, 2007)?
Fifth, please recall that Mr. Sloman wrote to Judge on October 25, 2007 that "The
United States takes no position as to the validity of any such claim under this statute." To
avoid any appearance that the United States is endorsing or encouraging litigation by the
identified individuals, we believe that such a statement should be included in any
notification letter.
I look fonyard to receiving your input on these issues. Until then, I remain,
JackA. Goldberger
JAG/na
cc: Jeffrey E . Epstein
• JOSEPH R.ATFERBURY
t JACK A. GOLDBERGER
JASON S.WEISS
' Board Certified Criminal TrialAttomey
Member of New Jersey & Florida Bars
July 10, 2008
A. Marie C. Villafana , Esq.
Assistant United States Attorney
500 S. Australian Avenue
4th Floor, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , Florida 33401
SENT VIA E-MAIL 8 FACSIMILE
(561) 820-8777
Re: Jeffrey E . Epstein
Dear Ms. Villafana :
Thank you for your letter of yesterday. Kindly allow me a few follow-up points.
First, we respectfully request a reasonable opportunity to review and comment on a draft
of the modified notification letter you intend to mail before you send it.
Second, we respectfully ask that you provide us with the identity of the victims' rights
organization described in your letter; the name and contact information of the person at
that organization with whom the Government has been communicating; copies of any
communications with that organization and the pro-bono lawyers /groups who were
recommended by that organization; and a description of any non-written communications
that the Government has had with that organization and the pro-bono lawyers /groups.
Third, while we appreciate your offer to disclose the names of the lawyers currently
representing the individuals when you have finished compiling all of that information, we
would be very grateful if you would provide any contact information you do have, on a
rolling basis.
Fourth, would it be possible for you to advise us of the full name of the minor to whom you
have referred by initials, as well as the identities of the three individuals whom the
Government notified about the deferred-prosecution agreement shortly after its signing (as
EXHIBIT B-64
One Cleartake Centre, Suite 1400 250 Australian Avenue South West Palm Beach . FL 33401
p 561.659.8300 f 561.835.8691 www.agwpa.com
JACK GOLDBERGER , ESQ.
JULY 10, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 2
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that the individuals identified
below are individuals whom the United States was prepared to name as victims of an
enumerated offense.
Identified Individuals
Fayth Pentek
By:
cc: Karen Atkinson, AUSA
Sincerely, (
•
R. Alexander Acosta
United States Attorney
A. Marie Villafafia
Assistant United States Attorney
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 3340!
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 10, 2008
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
. Jack A. Goldberger , Esq.
Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400
250 Australian Ave S.
West Palm Beach , FL 33401-5015
Re: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. Goldberger :
FINAL NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB and 2008-cf-
00938 I AXXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by an additional six months' imprisonment, followed by twelve months of
Community Control I, with conditions of community confineinent imposed by the Court.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida FILE COPY
SOO South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach . FL 3340!
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 10, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
EXHIBIT B-63
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
A. Marie VIHafalia
500 S. Australian Ave, 4th Floor
West Palm Beach , Florida 33401
(561) 8204711
Facsimile (561) 8204777
FACSIMILE COVER SHEET
TO: Jack Alan Goldberger
DATE: July 10. 2008
FAX NO. 561-835-8691 # OF PAGES: 2
PHONE NO. 561 659-8300 RE: Jeffrey Epstein
FROM: A. MARIE VILLAFARA, Assistant U.S. Attorney
PHONE NO. 561 209-1047
COMMENTS:
r.
* * * TRANSMISSION RESULT REPORT ( JUL.10:200B 5:26PM ) * * *
• . TTI USAO WPB FL
DATE TIKE ADDRESS MODE TIME PAGE RESULT PERS. NAME FILE __________----___
JUL.10. 5:26PM 5618358691 TES 0'24" P. 2 OK 434
: BATCH L : SEND LATER S : STANDARD A-: ASYNC MODE
C CONFIDENTIAL
e : FORWARDING
D : DETAIL 1 -: MIL_STD MODE
P : POLLING M : MEMORY
E ECM > : REDUCTION F FINE
G RICOH -MG3/COMPATIBLE MODE
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561)820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 10, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE
Jack A. Goldberger , Esq.
Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400
250 Australian Ave S.
West Palm Beach , FL 33401-5015
Re: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. Goldberger :
In response to your letter of today's date, copies of the victim notifications are being
mailed to you on a rolling basis. For those victims who have counsel, the attorneys' contact
information will be included. As you will see, the letter makes clear that neither the U.S.
Attorney 's Office nor the Federal Bureau of Investigation can take part in or otherwise assist
in civil litigation . The Office feels that is a sufficient statement of its position and we will
not include the language that you have requested.
Also, a final list of victims has been sent to you today via Certified Mail. That list is
identical to the draft provided to you on June 30th, except that it also includes the full name
of the minor victim .
By:
cc: Karen Atkinson, AUSA
Sincerely,
R. Alexander Acosta
United States Attorney ,
A. Marie Villafafia
Assistant United States Attorney
EXHIBIT B-62
(c) You eliminate from any notification any language that is currently contained in
the "acknowledgment" section of the June 30, 2008 memorandum; and
(d) You supplement the notification with the Government's previously made
representation that it is not vouching for the =un ity of any claim by any identified
individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. (10/25/07 ).
Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys
execute the rider / acknowledgment contained within your June 30 hand-delivered draft.
Specifically, we do not believe that the Non-Prosecution Agreement requires Mr. Epstein 's execution
of any such additional stipulation. Because we want to ensure that Mr. Epstein continues to strictly
comply with the letter of the parties' agreement, we respectfully ask that you explain why you
believe that the Non-Prosecution Agreement requires execution of your stipulation.
Our understanding of the Non-Prosecution Agreement is that it does not require Mr. Epstein to
"acknowledge" anything not already contained within the four corners of the written agreement. The
agreement certainly contains no written term obligating that he "waive any evidentiary challenge to
the introduction of a copy" of any "Notification of Identified Victims" in "any judicial proceeding
between any identified individual" and Mr. Epstein , as your memorandum currently requests.
Further, please note that your June 30 stipulation, as drafted, is not limited to Section 2255
proceedings. Rather, your June 30 draft requires Mr. Epstein to waive evidentiary challenges in "any
judicial proceeding" - - which clearly exceeds the bounds of the parties' written agreement.
Third, I would respectfully request that you provide me with the names of the "pro bono lawyers "
who, you indicated to me at our June 30 meeting at my office, were intending to represent certain
persons identified on your June 30 draft notification, as well as any knowledge that the Government
has as to how they were selected, and what communications the Government has had with them to
date.
Finally, please know that it is Mr. Epstein 's firm intent to fulfill strictly each term and condition of
his Non-Prosecution Agreement with the Government. Nothing in this letter should be construed,
however, as waiving any defense that may be available to Mr. Epstein under the parties' written
agreement.
I look forward to your response. Until then, I remain,
V trul yours,
a A. Goldberger
cc: Jeffrey Epstein
ty.st
July 9, 2008
A. Marie C. Villafana , Esq.
Assistant United States Attorney
United States Attorney 's Office
500 South Australian Avenue
41" Floor, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , Florida 33401
SENT PIA E-MAIL & FACSIMILE
(561) 820-8777
Re: Jeffrey E . Epstein
Dear Ms. Villafana :
Writgrc*: 4 14 s itA.,V4
tA:41:e.
• JOSEPH R.ATTERBURY
•t JACK A.GOLDBERGER
JASON S.WE1SS
•Board Certified CriminalTrial Attorney
t Member of New Jersey & Horlda Ben
Thank you for your letter to me dated July 8, 2008 and the draft document dated, e-mailed and faxed
to me at my office on June 30, 2008, styled "Notification of Identified Victims." I would like to
address a few related issues.
First, please note that we have several requests concerning any such notification. Specifically, we
request that:
(a) Any notification be sent to any individual by mail (or served upon their attorney,
to the extent known), and we respectfully object to any service by hand, a method of
service which carries the concomitant risk of conversations regarding the notification
that potentially would place the federal authorities in a position of being advocates
for civil litigation ;
(b) Any notification be effectuated by a separate mailing to each individual without
the inclusion of any language that appeared on the second page of your June 30, 2008
memorandum; i.e. rather than including in each notification a large section listing
"identified individuals" with redactions other than the name of the recipient (which
we contend would be a clear and impermissible signal to any individual that the
notification is a broad notification to numerous other alleged victims). Rather, a
simple one page notification directed only to the recipient, and limited to the
information currently on the first page of your draft memorandum would suffice.
One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400 250 Australian Avenue South West Palm Beach , FL 33401
p 561.659.8300 f 561.835.8691 www.agwpa.com EXHIBIT B-6I
P. 1
* * * TRANSMISSION RESULT REPORT ( JUL. 9.2008 4:05PM ) * * *
TTI USA° WPB FL
DATE TIME ADDRESS MODE TIME PAGE RESULT PERS. NAME FILE
JUL. 9. 4:04PM
• : BATCH L : SEND LATER S : STANDARD
A-: ASYNC MODE
5618358691 TES 0'36" P. 3 OK 412
C : CONFIDENTIAL @ : FORWARDING D DETAIL
1-: MIL_STD MODE
P : POLLING
E : ECM F : FINE
G-: RICOH-MG3/COMPATIBLE MODE
M : MEMORY
> : REDUCTION
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
A. Marie Villafalia
500 S. Australian Ave, 4th Floor
West Palm Beach , Florida 33401
(561) 820-8711
TO:
Facsimile (561) 820-8777
FACSIMILE COVER SHEET
Jack Alan Goldberger
DATE: July 9, 2008
3 FAX NO. 561-835-8691 # OF PAGES:
PHONE NO. 561 659-8300 RE: Jeffrey Epstein
FROM: A. MARIE VILLAFARA, Assistant U.S. Attorney
PHONE NO. 561 209-1047
COMMENTS:
JACK GOLDBERGER , ESQ.
JULY 9, 2008
PAGE 2
was prepared to include in an indictment. This means that, pursuant to Justice Department
policy, these are individuals for whom the United States believes it has proof beyond a
reasonable doubt that each of them was a victim of an enumerated offense. There will be no
statement one way or the other regarding the validity of any claim.
You have asked for an explanation of why I believe the Acknowledgment portion is
required by the terms of the Agreement. Under a strict reading of the Agreement, it is not
required, other than to Acknowledge that the United States has performed its obligation of
providing Mr. Epstein with a list of identified victims following his guilty plea and
sentencing. The purpose of the Acknowledgment was to create one single document
incorporating the parties' agreement on'the single topic of the right to proceed under 18
U.S.C. § 2255. This would avoid litigation regarding the victims' rights to have access to
the original Non-Prosecution Agreement. Without such an express Acknowledgment by Mr.
Epstein that the Notice contains the substance of that Agreement, I believe that the victims
will have a justification to petition for the entire agreement, which is contrary to the
confidentiality clause that the parties have signed. If you believe that particular words are
objectionable, I am happy to consider a modification.
As I mentioned to you last week, I will provide you with the names of the attorneys
currently representing the victims when we have compiled all of that information. Some of
the victims are represented by attorneys from the South Carolina Victim Assistance Network
and the Maryland Crime Victims Resource Center, both of which were recommended by a
victims' rights organization that receives grants from the Justice Department .
If you have any suggestions for a modification of the Acknowledgment, please let me
know.
Sincerely,
R. Alexander Acosta
United States Attorney
By:
cc: Karen Atkinson, AUSA
A. Marie Villafatia
Assistant United States Attorney
O.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561)8204711
Facsimile: (561)8204777
July 9, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE
Jack A. Goldberger , Esq.
Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400
250 Australian Ave S.
West Palm Beach , FL 33401-5015
Re: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. Goldberger :
Thank you for your letter of today's date regarding theproposed Victim Notification.
Let me address some of the items in your letter.
We have no objection to doing individual mailings. The Notification was drafted in
that way in order to minimize the number of documents that Mr. Epstein would sign. Now
that you have raised an objection to signing the Acknowledgment, each notification will list •
only the victim who is being notified.
In light of Mr. Epstein 's refusal to sign the Acknowledgment, the Acknowledgment
portion has been deleted and the notification has been slightly modified in order to provide
more complete information and it has been formatted as a letter rather than a more formal
"Notification" document.
We will not be including any statement that the U.S. Attorney 's Office is not vouching
for the veracity of any claim. As you know, the U.S. Attorney 's modification of the 2255
portion of the Agreement now limits our victim list to those persons whom the United States
EXHIBIT B-60
Recipient Road
Acosta . Alex (USAFLS ) Read: 7/9/2008 1:26 PM
Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ) Read: 7/9/20081:05 PM
Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Kuyrkendall, E N. (FBI )
Richards, Jason R. (FBI )
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 1:04 PM
To: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS ); Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Cc: Kuyrkendall, E N. (FBI ); Richards, Jason R. (FBI )
Subject: Response to Goldberger Letter
Here are my thoughts:
1. Notification only by mail: For those girls who are currently not represented (or for whom we do not know of
any representation), we intend to contact the victims by telephone to tell them of the resolution and to get mailing
addresses to send the written notification or to determine if they have secured counsel to send it to them. For the
girls who are represented, contact will be made by telephone followed by the mailing of the notification. I think a
"live" thank you is the least that is required at this point and a "check in" to make sure that girls who need
counseling are getting it. (FBI has already arranged counseling for several girls .) In any written response to Mr.
Goldberger , I would simply ignore this request.
2. Separate mailings: I have no objection to this change. The notice was drafted the way it was so that Epstein
would only have to sign one document rather than 33. Since he isn't going to sign any, that change is fine with
me.
3. Notification limited to the information on the first page of the draft notification: In light of Epstein 's refusal
to sign the acknowledgement, I think some additional explanation is required. I will prepare that revision and
send to you shortly.
4. Eliminate the Acknowledgement portion: I have no objection to this.
5. Supplement the notification with our previous statement that we are not vouching for the veracity of any
claim: I would reject this request and, in our response to Goldberger , state that we have limited our list to those
whom we were prepared to name in an indictment and, accordingly, we believe that there is proof beyond a
reasonable doubt that each was a victim of Epstein 's.
6. Explain why the acknowledgement is required: In our response to Goldberger , I think we should explain that
the acknowledgement language was meant to create a means for proving the existence of the agreement without
having to provide copies of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, which contains a confidentiality clause. While I
have no objection to revising the language, I think that Epstein 's position will lead to litigation regarding the need
to disclose the full agreement, which is contrary to the parties' interest in confidentiality. I agree that we cannot
force him to sign the acknowledgement, but he must accept the consequences of that decision.
7. Names of pro bono lawyers and information regarding their communications: I have already advised Mr.
Goldberger that I will provide him with the names and contact information of attorneys who represent the victims,
so I have no objection to that. I also have no objection to telling him that they were recommended by the Crime
Victims Rights Advocacy Group based upon a referral from the Justice Department . Other than that, I have no
intention of disclosing any "communications" that I had with them.
I will take a crack at revising the victim notifications and drafting a response to Goldberger . Any other thoughts I should
incorporate?
A. Marie Villajafia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
561 209-1047
EXHIBIT B-59
Tracking:
v v4. vv L.VV4.4 4 VI .4 vl • N., I II
July 8, 2008
A. Marie Villafana , AUSA
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , Florida 33401
I slit IIV, N.4,44 1 U04-JULOU I
' JOSEPH R.ATTERBURY
• I JACK A. GOLDBERGER
JASON S.WEISS
I &NA Conified CrinainaI Trul Aourney
Mentes.' of New Nati & Florida Roe
Re: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Marie,
I am out of the office today. I will response to your fax of July 8, 2008 by return of fax tomorrow.
Very truly yours,
‘ 41Jack A. Goldberger
Dictated hut not mid
JAG/na
One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400 250 Australian Avenue Solid) West Palm Beach , FL. 33401
p 561,659.8300 f 561.835.8691 www.agwpa.com
„III ,IV, QV I I. I %).1I-I UO I r. ul
ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A.
250 Australian Avenue South
Suite 1400
West Palm Beach , Florida 33401
(561) 659-8300
Fax: (561) 835-8691
FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET
DATE: July 8, 2008
TO: A. Marie Villafana , Assistant U.S. Attorney
FAX NO.: 561-820-8777
FROM: Nayanira, Assistant to Jack A. Goldberger , Esquire
REMARKS: Jeffrey Epstein
TOTAL PAGES: 2 , Including cover sheet
*** PLEASE NOTE - CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING ***
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDiDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS
ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PR EGED. CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT
FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. If the reader of this message is not the Intended recipient or
the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the Intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication Is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, and return the original message to us at the
above address via the U.S. Postal Mail Service. Thank you for your cooperation.
EXHIBIT B-58
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
A Marie Villafalta
500 S. Australian Ave, 4th Floor
West Palm Beach , Florida 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile (561) 820-8777
FACSIMILE COVER SHEET
TO: Jack Alan Goldberger
DATE: July 8. 2008
FAX NO. 561-835-8691 # OF PAGES: 3
PHONE NO. 561 659-8300 RE: Jeffrey Epstein
FROM: A. MARIE VILLAFARA. Assistant U.S. Attorney
PHONE NO. 561 209-1047
COMMENTS:
P. 1
* * * TRANSMISSION RESULT REPORT ( JUL. 8.2008 2:11PM ) * * *
TTI USA() WPB FL
DATE TIME ADDRESS MODE TIME PAGE RESULT PERS. NAPE FILE
JUL. 8. 2:10PM 5618358691 TES 0'34" P. 3 OK 398
* : BATCH C : CONFIDENTIAL P : POLLING M : MEMORY L : SEND LATER y01 : FORWARDING E : ECM > : REDUCTION
R F : FINE
\DE G-: RICOH-MG3ICOMPATIBLE MODE
JACK 9OLDBERGER, ESQ.
JULY 8, 2008
PAGE 2
to pursue damages. If the United States learns that a civil suit has been filed against Mr.
Epstein and he has denied that one of these victims is entitled to proceed under 18 U.S.C.
§ 2255, that will be considered a breach of the Non-Prosecution Agreement and the United
States will proceed accordingly.
Sincerely,
It. Alexander Acosta
United States Attorney
I ly :
A. Marie Villafafia
Assistant United States Attorney
cc: Karen Atkinson, AUSA
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 8, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE AND ELECTRONIC MAIL
Jack A. Goldberger , Esq.
Atterbury, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A.
One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400
25i.) Australian Ave S.
West Palm Beach , FL 33401-5015
Re: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. Goldberger :
In accordance with the terms of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, on June 30, 2008,
the United States Attorney 's Office provided you with a list of thirty-one individuals "whom
it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr.
Epstein ." Yesterday, I provided you with the identification of another victim whom I had
erroneously left off of that list. At the time the list was provided, Special Agent Kuyrkendall
and I impressed upon you the need to finalize this last piece of the agreement as quickly as
possible so that we could fulfill our victim notification obligations. In deference to your
vacation, we allowed you a week to provide us with any objections or requested
modifications to the list and/or the Notification language. Yesterday, I contacted you via
telephone and e-mail, but received no response.
Accordingly, the United States hereby notifies you that it will distribute the victim
notifications tomorrow, July 9, 2008, to each of the thirty-two identified victims, either
directly or via their counsel. A carbon copy of each notification will be provided to you, and
the notification will list you as the contact person for any civil litigation , if the victim decides
EXHIBIT B-57
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JUNE 30, 2008
PAGE 3 OF 3
that an exact copy of this Notification will be provided to each identified individual, except
that the names of all other identified individuals will be redacted, and I hereby waive any
evidentiary challenges to the introduction of a copy of this document—even in redacted
form—in any judicial proceeding between any identified individual and myself.
Dated:
Jeffrey Epstein
Witnessed by:
Roy Black , Esquire
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JUNE 30, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 3
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that the individuals identified
below are individuals whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an
enumerated offense.
Identified Individuals
Dated:
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have received this Notification from my attorney, Roy Black , Esquire, have read it
and discussed it with my attorney, and I hereby acknowledge that it accurately sets forth my
understanding and agreement with the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern
District of Florida regarding the notification and rights of identified victims. I understand
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Roy Black
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave.. Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 3340!
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB and 2008-cf-
009381A,DOUvD3) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by eighteen months' of Community Control 1, the first six months of which must
be served iniprisoned at the Palm Beach County Detention Facility.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less." •
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Roy Black
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JUNE 30, 2008
PAGE 3 OF 3
that an exact copy of this Notification will be provided to each identified individual, except
that the names of all other identified individuals will be redacted, and I hereby waive any
evidentiary challenges to the introduction of a copy of this document—even in redacted
form—in any judicial proceeding between any identified individual and myself.
Dated:
Jeffrey Epstein
Witnessed by:
Roy Black , Esquire
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JUNE 30, 2008
PAGE 2 GP 3
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that the individuals identified
below are individuals whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an
enumerated offense.
Identified Individuals
Dated:
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have received this Notification from my attorney, Roy Black , Esquire, have read it
and discussed it with my attorney, and I hereby acknowledge that it accurately sets forth my
understanding and agreement with the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern
District of Florida regarding the notification and rights of identified victims. I understand
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Roy Black
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 8204777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454MOOUVIB and 2008-cf-
00938 1 AXXKM:B) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by eighteen months' of Community Control 1, the first six months of which must
be served imprisoned at the Palm Beach County Detention Facility.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Roy Black
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JuNE 30, 2008
PAGE 3 OF 3
that an exact copy of this Notification will be provided to each identified individual, except
that the names of all other identified individuals will be redacted, and I hereby waive any
evidentiary challenges to the introduction of a copy of this document—even in redacted
form—in any judicial proceeding between any identified individual and myself.
Dated:
Jeffrey Epstein
Witnessed by:
Roy Black , Esquire
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JuNE 30, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 3
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that the individuals identified
below are individuals whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an
enumerated offense.
Identified Individuals
Dated:
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have received this Notification from my attorney, Roy Black , Esquire, have read it
and discussed it with my attorney, and I hereby acknowledge that it accurately sets forth my
understanding and agreement with the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern
District of Florida regarding the notification and rights of identified victims. I understand
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Roy Black
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 8204777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454AXXXMB and 2008-cf-
00938 lAXXYMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by eighteen months' of Community Control 1, the first six months of which must
be served imprisoned at the Palm Beach County Detention Facility.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Roy Black
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Pahn Beach. FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JUNE 30, 2008
PAGE 3 OF 3
understand that an exact copy of this Notification will be provided to each identified
individual, except that the names of all other identified individuals will be redacted, and I
hereby waive any evidentiary challenges to the introduction of a copy of this document—even
in redacted form—in any judicial proceeding between any identified individual and myself.
Dated:
Jeffrey Epstein
Witnessed by:
Jack Goldberger , Esquire
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JUNE 30, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 3
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that the individuals identified
below are individuals whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an
enumerated offense.
Identified Individuals
Dated:
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
el
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have received this Notification from my attorney, Jack Goldberger , Esquire, have
read it and discussed it with my attorney, and I hereby acknowledge that it accurately sets
forth my understanding and agreement with the Office of the United States Attorney for the
Southern District of Florida regarding the notification and rights of identified victims. I
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Jack Goldberger
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
S00 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561)820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454AXXX1v1B and 2008-cf-
00938 lAXIOCKB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by eighteen months' of Community Control 1, the first six months of which must
be served imprisoned at the Palm Beach County Detention Facility.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"My person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list, of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Jack Goldberger
U.S. Department of Justice
United Stales Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JUNE 30, 2008
PAGE 3 oF• 3
that an exact copy of this Notification will be provided to each identified individual, except
that the names of all other identified individuals will be redacted, and I hereby waive any
evidentiary challenges to the introduction of a copy of this document—even in redacted
form—in any judicial proceeding between any identified individual and myself.
Dated:
Jeffrey Epstein
Witnessed by:
Guy Lewis , Esquire
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JUNE 30, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 3
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that the individuals identified
below are individuals whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an
enumerated offense.
Identified Individuals
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
Dated: By:
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have received this Notification from my attorney, Guy Lewis , Esquire, have read it
and discussed it with my attorney, and I hereby acknowledge that it accurately sets forth my
understanding and agreement with the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern
District of Florida regarding the notification and rights of identified victims. I understand
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Guy Lewis
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos.. 2006-cf-009454/OO(Xle and 2008-cf-
009381AXXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by eighteen months' of Community Control I, the first six months of which must
be served imprisoned at the Palm Beach County Detention Facility.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . My judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Guy Lewis
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 3340/
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561)820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW, THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS CONFIDENTIAL AND
SHALL NOT
BE DISCLOSED EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL PROCEEDING.
N0TIFICATI0N OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JUNE. 30, 2008
I'AGE 3 OF 3
that an exact copy of this Notification will be provided to each identified individual, except
that the names of all other identified individuals will be redacted, and I hereby waive any
evidentiary challenges to the introduction of a copy of this document—even in redacted
form—in any judicial proceeding between any identified individual and myself.
Dated:
Jeffrey Epstein
Witnessed by:
Guy Lewis , Esquire
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
Jun 30, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 3
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that the individuals identified
below are individuals whom the United States was prepared to name as a victim of an
enumerated offense.
Identified Individuals
Dated:
It. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
ACKNOWLEDGMENT •
I have received this Notification from my attorney, Guy Lewis , Esquire, have read it
and discussed it with my attorney, and I hereby acknowledge that it accurately sets forth my
understanding and agreement with the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern
District of Florida regarding the notification and rights of identified victims. I understand
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Guy Lewis
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a plea
of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of prostitution )
and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009454MOCKMB and 2008-cf-
00938 1 AXXXMB) and was sentenced to a term of twelve months' imprisonment to be
followed by eighteen months' of Community Control I, the first six months of which must
be served imprisoned at the Palm Beach County Detention Facility.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same
rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein
had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes
of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein 's
attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an
Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial
authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining
which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is
the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position
as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no
less."
Initials of Jeffrey Epstein Initials of Guy Lewis
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561) 820-8711
Facsimile: (561)820-8777
June 30, 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
NOTICE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 18, UNITED
STATES CODE, SECTION 3509(d) AND FLORIDA LAW,
THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS
CONFIDENTIAL AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED
EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH A LEGAL
PROCEEDING.
EXHIBIT B-56
r
30 —
mice-aer (Auk- r- RVicuvt. GaRel -S
5„ i 5Fz. - 24.00
CC U t A
a 3)5 13/ - 2-2-0()
r
4n, fk
_idtricazit
7/ — i ---I.,17- --q‘22- 773
fa---1:5 4grcarc- UpfctL—
Siztol CAthgt4dA qc V 2 94 4 - 754' 4/
TM -"S-
NNITeak Lg./420a ---(5:55MPO* C.,,gt-i- C:51515-
got 31 ( - Bvt-tkcolloblilrick-flow—C44e) ge 4,71: 2-3V3
—
1'1 rrl
1 . gt-2--
• Sil l
EXHIBIT B-55
╭─────────── Page 234, Image 1 ────────────╮
│ _ [ | Fens, Be - ; │
│ DNiichoet Divehi + Ridirot Wilkes │
│ St _ │
│ │
│ ST, Herren 305 F-22000 │
│ Cee” Y07-737/- │
│ │
│ | Brad Guards _ WY 244 - =P5 1 │
│ se oS oo │
│ │
│ = a Lene CSD C8Y- SO │
│ │
│ ~ Be 31 (367 -Fiopeld Q.rice ayo. Gira ; │
│ |e AT -2383 │
│ │
│ pe Dydic. PE 2500 │
│ │
│ EXHIBIT B-55 │
╰──────────────────────────────────────────╯
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington , D.C. 20530
June 23, 2008
Jay Lefkowitz , Esq.
Kenneth Starr , Esq.
Kirkland and Ellis LLP
777 South Figueroa Street
Los Angeles , CA 90017
Gentlemen:
This Office has completed a thorough review of the U.S. Attorney 's handling of the matter
involving your client, Jeffrey Epstein . We have received and reviewed your letters of May 19,
June 3 and June 19, 2008, the attachments to the June 19 letter, as well as your submissions to
the Criminal Division and the U.S. Attorney 's Office. Additionally, we have reviewed an
extensive set of materials provided by the U.S. Attorney 's Office and conferred with a number of
highly experienced Department attorneys about this matter. The Deputy Attorney General has
also been briefed.
As you know, the Department of Justice vests considerable discretion in its U.S. Attorneys , and
the Deputy Attorney General will intervene in only the most unusual of circumstances. We do
not believe such intervention is warranted here. Even if we were to substitute our judgment for
that of the U.S. Attorney , we believe that federal prosecution of this case is appropriate.
Moreover, having reviewed your allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, and the facts
underlying them, we see nothing in the conduct of the U.S. Attorney 's Office that gives us any
reason to alter our opinion.
cc: Alex Acosta
Sincerely,
John Roth
Senior Associate Deputy Attorney General
EXHIBIT B-44
EXHIBIT B-45
╭────── Page 236, Image 1 ───────╮
│ Chy og AMCY e-rail 1 Black ard │
│ Golloug │
│ │
│ EXHIBIT B-45 │
╰────────────────────────────────╯
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:08 PM
To: Roy BLACK
Subject: RE: FW: Jeffrey Epstein
Hi Roy -- Is this the best number to call? (305) 371-6421
A. Marie Villafaha
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Original Message
From: Roy BLACK [mailto:RBLACK@royblack .com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:02 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc: jack goldberger
Subject: Re: FW: Jeffrey Epstein
Marie that is a good time. I also want to conference Jack Goldberger into the
call. This will be a wrap up call. Roy
>>> "Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )"
<Ann.Marie.C.VillafanaPusdoi.gov> 6/24/2008 12:23 PM >>> Dear Roy:
Jeff Sloman contacted me and asked me to return your call regarding the Epstein
matter. I am forwarding to you an e-mail that I sent to Jay Lefkowitz last
night.
Karen and I can call you at 3:30 to speak about your list of issues.
If that time does not work, please let me know what times you are available.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafafia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 5:55 PM
To: lefkowitz@kirkland.com ; Jay Lefkowitz
A
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. Lefk6witz:
I understand that the Deputy Attorney General has completed his review
of the Epstein matter and has determined that federal prosecution of
Mr. Epstein 's case is appropriate.
Accordingly, Mr. Epstein has until the close of business on Monday,
June 30, 2008, to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement
between the United States and Mr. Epstein (as modified by the U.S.
Attorney 's December 19th letter to Ms. Sanchez), including entry of a
guilty plea, sentencing, and surrendering to begin his sentence of
imprisonment.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at the number
shown below.
A. Marie Villafaha
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 4:05 PM
To: Roy BLACK ; Jack Goldberger
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein Agreement
Dear Roy and Jack:
I am just writing to re-state that it is the Government's position that we have a signed, binding agreement and
that there is no need for further modification.
Please keep us informed of the date and time of the change of plea and sentencing.
"Thank you.
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Tracking:
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Roy BLACK <RBLACK@royblack .com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:13 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: FW: Jeffrey Epstein
yes.
>>> "Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )"
<Ann.Marie.C.Villafana @usdoj.gov> 6/24/2008 3:08 PM >»
Iii Roy -- Is this the best number to call? (305) 371-6421
A. Marie Villafafla
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Original Message
From: Roy BLACK [mailto:RBLACK®rovblack.coml
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:02 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc: jack goldberger
Subject: Re: FW: Jeffrey Epstein
Marie that is a good time. I also want to conference Jack Goldberger
into the call. This will be a wrap up call. Roy
>>> "Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )"
<Ann.Marie.C.Villafana @usdoj.gov> 6/24/2008 12:23 PM >>>
Dear Roy:
Jeff Sloman contacted me and asked me to return your call regarding
the
Epstein matter. 1 am forwarding to you an e-mail that I sent to Jay
1.efkowitz last night.
Karen and I can call you at 3:30 to speak about your list of issues.
If that time does not work, please let me know what times you are
available.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafafla
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820.8777
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 5:55 PM
To: lefkowitz@kirkland.com ; Jay Lefkowitz
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. Lefkowitz :
I understand that the Deputy Attorney General has completed his review
of the Epstein matter and has determined that federal prosecution of
Mr. Epstein 's case is appropriate.
Accordingly, Mr. Epstein has until the close of business on Monday,
June 30, 2008, to comply with the terms and conditions of the
agreement
between the United States and Mr. Epstein (as modified by the U.S.
Attorney 's December 19th letter to Ms. Sanchez), including entry of a
guilty plea, sentencing, and surrendering to begin his sentence of
imprisonment.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at the
number
shown below.
A. Marie Villafafta
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Roy BLACK <RBLACK@royblack .com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:02 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc: jack goldberger
Subject: Re: FW: Jeffrey Epstein
Marie that is a good time. I also want to conference Jack Goldberger
into the call. This will be a wrap up call. Roy
>>> "Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )"
<Ann.Marie.C.Villafana ®usdoj.gov> 6/24/2008 12:23 PM >>>
Dear Roy:
Jeff Sloman contacted me and asked me to return your call regarding the
Epstein matter. I am forwarding to you an e-mail that I sent to Jay
Lefkowitz last night.
Karen and I can call you at 3:30 to speak about your list of issues.
If that time does not work, please let me know what times you are
available.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafalla
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 5:55 PM
To: lefkowitz@kirkland.com ; Jay Lefkowitz
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAF S)
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. Lefkowitz :
I understand that the Deputy Attorney General has completed his review
of the Epstein matter and has determined that federal prosecution of
Mr. Epstein 's case is appropriate.
Accordingly, Mr. Epstein has until the close of business on Monday,
June 30, 2008, to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement
between the United States and Mr. Epstein (as modified by the U.S.
Attorney 's December 19th letter to Ms. Sanchez), including entry of a
guilty pica, sentencing, and surrendering to begin his sentence of
imprisonment.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at the number
shown below.
A. Marie Villafafla
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ) <1Sloman ®usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:14 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Jeffrey Epstein Agreement
Let's talk about going to the COP
Original Message
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Roy BLACK <RBLACK@royblack .com>; Jack Goldberger <jgoldberger©agwpa.com>
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Sent: Tue Jun 24 16:04:55 2008
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein Agreement
Dear Roy and Jack:
1 am just writing to re-state that it is the Government's position that we have a signed, binding agreement and that there is no need for
further modification.
Please keep us informed of the date and time of the change of plea and sentencing.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafafia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFIS ) <1Sloman@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 8:46 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFIS )
Subject: Re: Jeffrey Epstein Agreement
I have a des apptmt @ 10:45 in ftm laud so call me on my cell.
— Original Message --
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Wed Jun 25 08:39:31 2008
Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein Agreement
Hi Jeff— I think I have designed a solution to the 2255 issue and I will call you to discuss the plea. I am still finishing up these search
warrants . As soon as they are done, I will give you a call.
A. Marie Villafafta
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
— Original Message—
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:14 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Jeffrey Epstein Agreement
Let's talk about going to the COP
— Original Message --
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Roy BLACK <RBLACK®royblack .com>; Jack Goldberger <jgoldberger@agwpa.com>
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Sent: Tue Jun 24 16:04:55 2008
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein Agreement
Dear Roy and Jack:
I am just writing to re-state that it is the Government's position that we have a signed, binding agreement and that there is no need for
further modification.
Please keep us informed of the date and time of the change of plea and sentencing.
Thank you.
A. Marie Villafafta
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
EXHIBIT B-46
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ) clSlomangiusa.doj .gov>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:05 PM
Cc: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Fw. Revised Victim Notification
Attachments: U.wpd
This simplifies it. What do u think?
---- Original Message --
From: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Wed Jun 25 18:00:14 2008
Subject: RE: Revised Victim Notification
What do you think
<<U.wpd>>
«LLANO»
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:43 PM
To: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
Subject: FW: Revised Victim Notification
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:25 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS ); Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Revised Victim Notification
Hi Jeff -- I have tried to phrase it in a way that suggests that, since Epstein has performed certain provisions, it is now our turn to
perform.
<< File: Revised Victim Notification.wpd >>
A. Marie Villafafla
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
EXHIBIT B-47
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ) <JSIoman@usa.dolgov>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:05 PM
Cc: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Fvr. Revised Victim Notification
Attachments: U.wpd
This simplifies it. What do u think?
--- Original Message --
From: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Wed Jun 25 18:00:14 2008
Subject: RE: Revised Victim Notification
What do you think
«U.wpd>>
«U.wpd>>
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:43 PM
To: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
Subject: FW: Revised Victim Notification
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:25 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS ); Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Revised Victim Notification
Hi Jeff— I have tried to phrase it in a way that suggests that, since Epstein has performed certain provisions, it is now our turn to
perform.
« File: Revised Victim Notification.wpd >>
A. Marie Villafafia
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
08-80736-CV-MARRA 96
EXHIBIT B-48
P-014982
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ) <AVillafana@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 8:31 AM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Subject: RE Revised Victim Notification
Jeff — tam running off to grand jury . I will call as soon as I get back, probably around 9:45. Thanks.
A. Marie Villafaha
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
----Original Message ---
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:05 PM
Cc: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Fw: Revised Victim Notification
This simplifies it. What do u think?
— Original Message ---
From: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Wed Jun 25 18:00:14 2008
Subject: RE: Revised Victim Notification
What do you think
<<U.wpd»
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:43 PM
To: Acosta , Alm (USAFLS )
Subject: FW: Revised Victim Notification
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:25 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS ); Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Revised Victim Notification
Hi Jeff— I have tried to phrase it in a way that suggests that, since Epstein has performed certain provisions, it is now our turn to
perform.
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014983
« File: Revised Victim Notification.wpd >>
A. Marie Villarada
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 8204777
08-80736-CV-MARRA
P-014984
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach FL 33401
(361)820-8711
Facsimile: (561)820-8777
July 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a
plea of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of
prostitution ) and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th
Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009495AXXXMEB and
2008- ) and was sentenced to a term of eighteen months' imprisonment
to be followed by years of probation.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, the United States has agreed to
defer federal prosecution in favor of this state plea and sentence, subject to certain
conditions.
One such condition to which Epstein has agreed is the following:
"My person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense
enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the
same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr.
Epstein had been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense.
For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall
provide Mr. Epstein 's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was
prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by
Mr. Epstein . Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including
any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must
meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these
identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr.
Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less."
Through this letter, this Office hereby provides Notice that the individuals
identified below are individuals whom the United Stats was prepared to name as a victim
of an enumerated offense.
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014985
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JULY 2008
PAGE 2 OF 3
Identified Individuals
Jane Doe #1
Jane Doe #2
Jane Doe #3
Jane Doe #4
Jane Doe #5
Jane Doe #6
Jane Doe #7
Jane Doe #8
Jane Doe #9
Jane Doe #10
Jane Doe #11
Jane Doe #12
Jane Doe #13
Jane Doe #14
Jane Doe #15
Jane Doe #16
Jane Doe #17
Jane Doe #18
Jane Doe #19
Jane Doe #20
Dated: By:
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I have received this Notification from my attorney, Roy Slack Esquire, have read it and discussed it with my
attorney, and I hereby acknowledge that it accurately sets forth my understanding and agreement with the Office of the
United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida . I understand that an exact copy of this Notification will be
provided to each identified individual, except that the names of all other identified individuals will be redacted, and I
hereby waive any evidentiary challenges to the introduction of a copy of this
document-even in redacted form-in any judicial proceeding between any identified
individual and myself.
Jane Doe #21
Jane Doe #22
Jane Doe #23
Jane Doe #24
Jane Doe #25
Jane Doe #26
Jane Doe #27
Jane Doe #28
Jane Doe #29
Jane Doe #30
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014986
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JULY 2008
PAGE 3 OF 3
Dated:
Jeffrey Epstein
Witnessed by:
Roy Black , Esquire
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014987
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
(561)8204711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
July 2008
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
On June 30, 2008, Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as "Epstein ) entered a
plea of guilty to violations of Florida Statutes Sections 796.07 (felony solicitation of
prostitution ) and 796.03 (procurement of minors to engage in prostitution ), in the 15th
Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case Nos. 2006-cf-009495AXXXtv1B and
2008- ) and was sentenced to a term of eighteen months' imprisonment
to be followed by years of probation.
In light of the entry of the guilty plea and sentence, and pursuant to the terms of
the deferred prosecution agreement between Epstein and the United States Attorney 's
Office for the Southern District of Florida (hereinafter referred to as "the Office"), the
Office hereby provides notice to Epstein that the following is a list of individuals whom
the Office was prepared to name as victims in an Indictment charging Epstein with
violations of federal statutes enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255
(hereinafter referred to as "identified individuals").
The terms of the deferred prosecution agreement provide that the identified
individuals shall have the same right to seek damages pursuant to Title 18, United States
Code, Section 2255, as they would have had if Mr. Epstein had been tried and convicted
of those enumerated offenses in a federal court. Section 2255 provides, in relevant part:
Any person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violation of section . . .
2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such
violation, regardless of whether the injury occurred while such person was a
minor, may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall
recover the actual damages such person sustains and the cost of the suit,
including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any person as described in the
preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less
than $150,000 in value.
Thus, pursuant to the deferred prosecution Agreement between the Office and
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014988
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED terms
JULY 2008
PAGE 2 OF 3
Epstein , the Office hereby provides Notice to the identified individuals that each of them
is a person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in
Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, committed by Epstein . The Office further
provides Notice to the identified individuals that, pursuant to the Agreement between the
Office and Epstein , a copy of this document may be introduced in a judicial proceeding
between any such identified individual and Epstein , and that any judicial authority
interpreting this Notification, including any authority determining what evidentiary
burdens, if any, a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of Epstein and the
Office to place the identified individuals in the same position as they would have been
had Epstein been convicted of those federal offenses.
Identified Individuals
Jane Doe #1
Jane Doe #2
Jane Doe #3
Jane Doe #4
Jane Doe #5
Jane Doe #6
Jane Doe #7
Jane Doe #8
Jane Doe #9
Jane Doe #10
Jane Doe #11
Jane Doe #12
Jane Doe #13
Jane Doe #14
Jane Doe #15
Jane Doe #16
Jane Doe #17
Jane Doe #18
Jane Doe #19
Jane Doe #20
Dated: By:
A. MARIE VILLAFARA
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I have received this Notification from my attorney, Roy Black Esquire, have read it and discussed it with my
attorney, and I hereby acknowledge that it accurately sets forth my understanding and agreement with the Office of the
United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida . I understand that an exact copy of this Notification will be
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014989
Jane Doe #21
Jane Doe #22
Jane Doe #23
Jane Doe #24
Jane Doe #25
Jane Doe #26
Jane Doe #27
Jane Doe #28
Jane Doe #29
Jane Doe #30
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
NOTIFICATION OF IDENTIFIED VICTIMS
JULY 2008
PAGE 3 OF 3
provided to each identified individual, except that the names of all other identified individuals will be redacted, and
hereby waive any evidentiary challenges to the introduction of a copy of this
document-even in redacted form-in any judicial proceeding between any identified
individual and myself.
Dated:
Jeffrey Epstein
Witnessed by:
Roy Black , Esquire
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014990
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Senior. Robert (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 5:30 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Cc: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Subject: FW: Epstein
I agree. Marie can you make this communication today please. Thank you.
Original Message
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 6:45 AM
To: Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Subject: Epstein
Bob,
If we get the go-ahead, I think Marie should immediately notify Lefkowitz that JE
has until COB Monday June 30 to comply with the 9/24 Agreement as modified by the
USA's 12/17 letter otherwise the Office will deem him in breach. What say you?
Jeff
EXHIBIT B-49
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 5:55 PM
To: lefkowitz @kirkland.conY: Jay Leffcowitz
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. 1-efkowitz:
I understand that the Deputy Attorney General has completed his review of the Epstein matter and has
determined that federal prosecution of Mr. Epstein 's case is appropriate.
Accordingly, Mr. Epstein has until the close of business on Monday. June 30, 2008, to comply with the terms
and conditions of the agreement between the United States and Mr. Epstein (as modified by the U.S. Attorney 's
December I9th letter to Ms. Sanchez), including entry of a guilty plea, sentencing, and surrendering to begin his
sentence of imprisonment.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at the number shown below.
A. Marie Villafaaa
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Tracking:
Amenold, Jennifer
Andriano,
Britan
wegel,
iciliano, Jennifer
mythe,
elasco, Shady
Wild, Courtne
lis,
20'd itila
3/14 Recently identified. Law Enforcement has not interviewed.
17 No recollection regarding ever going to Epstein 's residence or providing massage to Epstein
17 Original interview stated that she modeled lingerie for Epstein .
117 Uncooperative. Law Enforcement has not interviewed.
5/16 Uncooperative - confirmed age she provided massage but said Epstein did not touch her or masturbate .
17 Left 2 messages. Original Interview to FBI stated that she was 18 and she did not admit to providing massages .
15 Inconsistent statements to Law Enforcement Uncooperative.
tVa No contact with Epstein nor did she know anyone associated with Epstein .
EXHIBIT B-50
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana . Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Friday. June 27, 2008 3:48 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS ): Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Cc: Nesbitt Kuyrkendall (E.Kuyrkendall@ic.fbi.goy); Jason Richards (Jason.Richards2
@ic.fbi.gov )
Subject: Epstein Plea
Wow, am I good. Here it is already. I think our faxes crossed in cyber-space . Sorry for the poor quality, that is how it
came to me.
Epstein
Plea001.pdf
;4. :Marie fliltafaiiii
idIssistant US. .'A tiorney
561 209-1047
781 EXHIBIT B-5I
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Friday. June 27, 2008 3:40 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Atkinson. Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: 080627 Goldberger Black Itr.pdf
Here is the letter that I just faxed over.
Police checked the docket and it is on at 8:30 for a "status conference." It also looks like the required
procurement of minors charge has been filed. Will keep you posted.
Iberger Black Itri
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 10:14 AM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Still haven't heard anything
How did things go with Chief Reiter ?
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
Tracking: EXHIBIT B-52 797
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 12:56 PM
To: Villeama,AnnblarieC.(JSAFLS)
Subject: Re: Chief reiter
Good
Original Message
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Sat Jun 28 11:21:34 2008
Subject: Chief reiter
Jeff. I spoke with the chief this morning. He is going to notify victims about
the plea.
EXHIBIT B-53
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 5:08 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Epstein
Hold the letter
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
Original Message
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
Sent: Fri Dec 07 17:05:56 2007
Subject: Epstein
Hello - Any word? Am I free to send out the victim notification letter? And, is
it alright to send copies of the victim notification letter to Mr. Josefsberg ?
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Phone 561 209-1047
Fax 561 820-8777
EXHIBIT B-54
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014420
r callziai artezza-
-Lesii k lenre
stakilsaf_ra_liut-gv 111MJ. ; Aka_ _ a _stgi 1/2
RS 251 4 - 9;544_
I1: 50 aa16.12,_LA aimd_ a-to el
---a , _Can----411AXIBLOCICS
ibiat0121 /S_ _ crednACh6<15...!.
'ILAtainAl2/2eA. " _We
2.Lthe#__16 1
vt _ A i_J-A4_nistad__
/1/4 _trasiai•
11%52- Fax EQCL12ak
calt • -
EXHIBIT B-43
╭─────── Page 264, Image 1 ───────╮
│ Tare (8) 20088 │
│ │
│ Brook couna Bx Courtrws │
│ WW) fh pag cat │
│ — Tau lhe Ae url │
│ | elle to st eee │
│ Y │
│ │
│ (eld laos 45 24h G54 │
│ │
│ soa Auer A. ook | place │
│ oy OE a pecs │
│ Rolowdlo's wstrucho’ floy canie │
│ Sapaueadlalls” Use ma a │
│ │
│ pe ie agg | │
│ │
│ on ois │
│ │
│ EXHIBIT B-43 │
╰─────────────────────────────────╯
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Brad Edwards (be@bradedwardslaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 11:34 AM
To: Villafana . Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: Jeff Epstein
Hi Marie,
I have information and concerns that I would like to share. While I understand that you are limited in what you can
discuss. I would like to meet with you and discuss my plans. This would be beneficial to you and me. Let me know if you
are interested in meeting and talking. My schedule is free next Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, July 23-25. If any of
those days are open for you, then I will go to you and can meet you at any time convenient for you. I am scheduling to
meet with my client again next week in your area anyway, so it would be no problem for me to meet you on the same
day. I look forward to hearing back from you.
Sincerely,
Brad Edwards , Esquire
Law Office of Brad Edwards & Associates
2028 Harrison Street
Suite 202
Hollywood, Florida 33020
Telephone: 954414-8033 (Broward)
305-935-2011 (Miami -Dade)
Facsimile: 954-924- 1530(Broward)
305/935-4227 (Miami -Dade)
e-mail: be@bradedwardslaw.com
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended for the
use of the individual or entity to which it is
addressed and may contain information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure
under applicable laws. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, printing,
reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this communication may be subject to legal restriction or sanction.
j.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Reach, FL 33401
(561)820-8711
Facsimile: (561) 820-8777
April 9, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE
Richard H. Willets, Esq.
Mr. Michael Danchuk
2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404
Lake Worth, FL 33461
Re: Carolyn El
Dear Messrs. Willits and Danchuk:
Thank you for your letter of March 28, 2008, regarding
Pursuant to the strict rules of grand jury secrecy, I am not able to prow e you wt e
information that you have requested. I believe that some of the information you are
seeking is available from ublic sources on the intemet. We also do not have any
photographs of Ms.
I regret that I cannot be of more assistance. I would appreciate it if you would
keep me updated on the course of the civil litigation .
Sincerely,
R. Alexander Acosta
United States Attorney
A. Marie Vitfafaka
Assistant United States
Attorney
cc: E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, FBI EXHIBIT B-42
A. Maria Di Ilafana, F-sq.
March 28, 2008
Paga 2
We look forward to hearing from you on whether you can assist us.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Michael Danchuk
Legal Administrator/Paralegal
MD/
cc :
chard H. Esq.
Richard H. Willits, P.A.
Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer
2290 10th Avenue North, Suite 404
Lake Worth, Florida 33461
Office: (561) 582-7600 Fax: (561) 588-8819
March 28, 2008
A. Maria Dillafana, Esq.
US Dept. of Justice
500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400
West Palm Beach , FL 33401
Re: Our Client:
Defendant: Je ey Epstein
Dear Ms. Dillafana:
Please be advised we have been retained to represent EM as a result of a relationship
with Mr. Epstein .
As we understand you are investigating this matter, we wanted you to be aware of our involvement.
We have filed a lawsuit in Palm Beach County Circuit Court under Ms. initials, C.M.A.
We are using the initials to try to keep publicity on this matter limited for Ms. Andriano's benefit.
Possibly, you can help us with one of the problems that we are having. We have not been able to
serve Mr. Epstein , and his attorney will not accept service on his behalf
We had discussed this with FBI Agent Elizabeth Kirkdale, and she suggested that we contact you to
see if you could provide us the information we are requesting.
We are trying to locate Mr. Epstein 's airplane "tail registration number" for the 727 plane that he
has. If you have this information and can provide it to us, it would be greatly appreciated.
Also we understand that either the FBI or your office may have photographs taken of Ms.
by allegedly for Mr. Epstein .
If you do have these photographs, we, of course, would request that they be preserved and also
copies made for us.
If there are any copy charges involved, we would be happy to reimburse your department.
EXI-I1B1T 8-41
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ) <JSIoman@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 9:29 AM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS ); Kuyrkendall, E N. (MM) (FBI ); Richards, Jason R. (MM) (FBI )
Subject: RE: Epstein
No telling how long the DAG's office will take to decide. Tuesday is off.
—Original Message—
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 9:03 AM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS ); Kuyrkendall, E N. (FBI ); Richards, Jason R. (FBI )
Subject: Epstein
Hi Jeff and Bob. I received Jeff's e-mail stating that the DAG agreed to meet with epstein 's people. Does this mean that Tuesday is
off? I need to let the gj coordinator know.
Also, I am sure that you remember in. She was the person whom we initially classified as a victim until epstein 's attorneys
complained. Well. nesbitt ha inigted a girl who was I4 or I5 when she first went to epstein 's house who reports that epstein
told her that he had sex with. probably would have been 15 or 16 when this conversation occurred.) The girl also reports
that she told epstein her true age and epstein told her that he doesn't care about age.
I know that cpstein's people will, no doubt, continue to tell the dag and others that epstein didn't know about the girls ' ages so I
thought you should know.
Please let me know about tuesday so I don't needlessly spoil nesbitt's sunday. And, any chance the case was discussed with the ag
when he was in town?
Thanks.
EXHIBIT B-40
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ) <AVillafana@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 1:20 PM
To: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Epstein
Please tell me you that you are joking. Maybe we should throw him a party and tell him we are sorry to have bothered him.
Original Message
From: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Tue May 27 10:27:10 2008
Subject: Epstein
Don't know what is up but Barry talked to Rolando and according to Rolando said something about 90 days in jail. Rolando is talking
to Jeff-he said. K
08-80736-CV-MARRA EXHIBIT B-39
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Senior, Robert (USAFLS ) <RSenior@usa.doi.gou>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 5:09 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Epstein
Perfect. Enjoy your trip. Wc'rc in good shape (so far).
Original Message
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:56 PM
To: Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Epstein
Hi bob. I get back on saturday. I will spend sunday with nesbitt and monday with you. I will be there by 10:00 unless you need me
there earlier.
Original Message
From: Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ); Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Sent: Tue May 27 15:24:50 2008
Subject: RE: Epstein
Marie, are you back ? We need to spend some time together on the indictment. I was planning on Monday because I thought you
were back that day but if you're already back let me know. By the way, Jeff and Alex have been very clear that we are not negotiating
with this guy any more in any way.
Thx. Bob
----Original Message
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFI.S)
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 2:54 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Epstein
Hi jeff. Karen sent me an email about epstein wanting to do less time. I hope that his request will be denied. The original deal was
supposed to be 2 years so he has already gotten a big break. Plus we have identified more victims since we agreed to the 18 months.
Please keep me posted. Thanks.
EXHIBIT B-38
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014927
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ) <AVillafana@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:56 PM
To: Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Subject: Re: Epstein
Hi bob. I get back on saturday. I will spend sunday with nesbitt and monday with you. I will be there by 10:00 unless you need me
there earlier.
---- Original Message
From: Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ); Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Sent: Tue May 27 15:24:50 2008
Subject: RE: Epstein
Marie, are you back ? We need to spend some time together on the indictment. I was planning on Monday because I thought you
were back that day but if you're already back let me know. By the way, Jeff and Alex have been very clear that we are not negotiating
with this guy any more in any way.
Thx. Bob
Original Message -----
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 2:54 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Ce: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Epstein
Ili jeff. Karen sent me an email about cpstein wanting to do less time. I hope that his request will be denied. The original deal was
supposed to be 2 years so he has already gotten a big break. Plus we have identified more victims since we agreed to the 18 months.
Please keep me posted. Thanks.
08-80736-CV-MARRA
P-014926
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
From: Senior, Robert (USAFLS ) <RSenior@usa.doj .gov>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:25 PM
To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ); Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: RE: Epstein
Marie, are you back ? We need to spend some time together on the indictment. I was planning on Monday because I thought you
were back that day but if you're already back let me know. By the way, Jeff and Alex have been very clear that we arc not negotiating
with this guy any more in any way.
Thx. Bob
Original Message
From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 2:54 PM
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Senior, Robert (USAFLS )
Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS )
Subject: Epstein
Hi jeff. Karen sent me an email about cpstein wanting to do less time. I hope that his request will be denied. The original deal was
supposed to be 2 years so he has already gotten a big break. Plus we have identified more victims since we agreed to the III months.
Please keep me posted. Thanks.
08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014925
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
make an independent decision not adversely affected by conclusions that over and over have
proven, witness by witness , allegation by allegation, to be inaccurate and unwarranted and not an
appropriate basis for the exercise of federal prosecutorial authority.
RFP MIA 000440
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
role. They said they would only advise on an abuse of discretion standard. Making the
outcome a foregone conclusion. Furthermore, in response to the February 25 e-mail,
which attempted to establish a schedule to limit the entire review process (the defense has
repeatedly suggested that the misconduct was intertwined with the investigation and
would therefore seek higher review), Mr. Lefkowitz e-mailed Mr. Acosta directly. On
February 29, 2008, Mr. Sloman responded to Mr. Lefkowitz 's e-mail to Mr. Acosta ,
stating that Mr. Sloman was acting out of frustration, but "[p]lease be assured that it has
not, and never has been, this Office's intent to interfere or restrict the "review process"
for either Mr. Epstein or CEOS . I leave it to you and CEOS to figure out how best to
proceed and will await the results of that process." As stated above, CEOS determined
that it would not review many of the defense's objections and as to the remainder of those
objections, its review would be limited (contrary to Mr. Acosta 's assurances), which left
the need, supplemented by the defense's subsequent request, for a more thorough review
of critical issues by others at the Department of Justice . Mr. Sloman's re-imposition of
the (albeit modestly extended) timetable was an obvious attempt, in violation of his
February 29 agreement, to thwart the request made by the defense to the Deputy Attorney
general , to complete the review process that Mr. Acosta bad promised.
11. "DELAY."
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• In a section entitled "Delay." Mr. Sloman states that "the SDFL again agreed to
accommodate Epstein 's request to appear in state court for plea and sentencing on
January 4, 2008."
Id., p. 3.
The Truth:
• Curiously, Mr. Sloman fails to mention correspondence from the U.S. Attorney stating
that delay of that date would be "inevitable" as the defense has raised "serious questions"
about the propriety of the prosecution. Strikingly, in that same section, Mr. Sloman
claims that "the Agreement did not contemplate a staggered 'plea and sentencing,'"
despite quoting, three sentences earlier, from the Agreement's staggered requirement
that Epstein plead and be sentenced by October 26, and "begin serving his sentence not
later than January 4, 2008."
• • •
We are, like most attorneys seeking Department review, without access to the USAO
prosecution summaries or other submissions to the Department. Given the substantial issues that
have been raised in this and other submissions, we request that you conduct a de novo review
that goes beneath the face of any conclusions being advocated by the USAO ; instead, we seek a
review that is based on the transcripts of witness testimony themselves so that the reviewer can
RFP MIA 000439
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
this same individual would nevertheless be entitled to engage an attorney paid for by Mr.
Epstein to recover $150,000 of damages from Mr. Epstein under § 2255 without ever
alleging any injury. In fact, the defense was told that the only question Mr. Epstein
would be permitted to ask before paying the girls is " have you ever met Epstein .". Thus,
the Deferred Prosecution Agreement places identified individuals in a far better position
than they would be in if Mr. Epstein were convicted at trial.
9. ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHT TO SELECT LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE.
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• "Prior to any issues arising concerning the implementation of the 2255 provision, the
SDFL unilaterally agreed to assign its responsibility to select the attorney representative
for the alleged victims to an independent third-party."
See Tab I, May 19, 2008 Letter from J. Sloman, p. 4, f.3.
The Truth:
• That such an assignment was the SDFL 's "unilateral" decision is false. Before the
SDFL decided to assign selection of the "attorney representative" to an independent third
party, AUSA Marie Villafana had already proposed an "attorney representative." She
had proposed local products-liability lawyer , Humberto Ocariz, and claimed he bad been
recommended by a "good friend in the Appellate Division." Ms. Villafana 's account was
misleading, as it omitted that this "good friend" was her live-in boyfriend, and that Mr.
Ocariz was his former law-school roommate. When we discovered this independently,
we objected. Only then did the SDFL propose assigning the selection process to an
independent special master and agree to amend the Deferred Prosecution Agreement.
Thus, while it may be true that the SDFL assigned its selection responsibility to avoid the
appearance of favoritism, it did not do it "unilaterally," but, rather, only after Epstein
uncovered the Office's misleading disclosure and apparent conflict-of-interest.
10. TIMETABLE FOR MOVING FORWARD.
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• "On February 25, 2008, I sent you an e-mail setting forth a timetable for moving forward
in the event that CEOS disagreed with your position. That time is now."
Id., p. 6.
The Truth:
• Mr. Sloman provides only part of the history of this case in order to justify his improper
actions. He had stated he would close the investigation if CEOS told him to. However,
CEOS at our very first contact said that under no circumstances did they see that as their
RFP MIA 000438
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
8. ALL IDENTIFIED VICTIMS BE PUT IN SAME POSITION AS IF EPSTEIN
HAD BEEN TRIED.
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• "The Agreement provides for a method of compensation for the victims such that they
would be placed in the same position as if Epstein had been convicted of one of the
enumerated offenses set forth in Title 18, United States Code Section, 2255."
Id.
The Truth:
• Mr. Sloman continues to mischaracterize the highly irregular provisions of the Deferred
Prosecution Agreement. The SDFL did not merely attempt to preserve the compensation
rights of those it identified as victims; it attempted to create compensation rights for those
it identified, without imposing on them the burden of proving that they were in fact
victims under § 2255.
o In the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, the SDFL required Mr. Epstein to waive
the right to contest liability under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 as to a list of individuals that
the SDFL would not disclose to Mr. Epstein until after he was sentenced and to
pay for an attorney to secure compensation under § 2255 for those undisclosed
individuals, or if they decided to sue Mr. Epstein .
o § 2255 ordinarily provides individuals with a right to recover minimum guaranteed
damages of $150,000, without having to prove actual damages, only if: (I) they
were victims of an enumerated federal offense, including offenses under 18 U.S.C.
§§ 2422 and 2423, (2) they were minors at the time of the offense, and most
importantly (3) they were personally injured as a result of the offense.
o The defense has confirmed examples of women who testified that they were not
victims of Mr. Epstein and suffered no personal injury. These women were,
nevertheless, on the list of "victims" identified by the government. . In fact, when
confronted with the testimony of a women who denied both being a victim and
incurring personal injury, Ms. Villafana actually acknowledged such testimony .
To justify inclusion of that woman on the government's list, however, Ms.
Villafana then challenged her own witness 's credibility.
• For this reason, it is false to state that these "identified" individuals are in the same
position that they would have been had Epstein been convicted at trial. Had there been a
trial, Mr. Epstein would have had a right to confront these individuals through cross-
examination. Any individual that did not establish that she was a minor victim of conduct
that satisfied each element of an enumerated statute under § 2255,or that she suffered
personal injury, would not qualify for any treatment under § 2255. However, under the
Deferred Prosecution Agreement, as an "identified individual" on the government's list,
RFP MIA 000437
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
Agreement to Defer Prosecution to the State, an agreement without precedent and fraught
with substantial practical and legal hurdles to its implementation.
6. THE SDFL DID NOT DEFER TO THE STATE.
Sloman's Letter:
• "(Tihe SDFL indicated a willingness to defer to the State the length of incarceration."
Id., p. 2.
The Truth:
• The SDFL neither deferred to the State, nor even discussed with the State, the length of
Mr. Epstein 's incarceration. In a letter to the defense, Criminal Division Chief, Matthew
Menchel rejected the sentence contemplated by the State's plea agreement, writing that
"the federal interest will not be vindicated in the absence of a two-year term of state
imprisonment." See Tab 40, August 3, 2007 Email from M. Menchel . Of course, this
position is contrary to Section 9-2031D of the U.S. Attorney 's Manual (indicating that
the "result" of a state prosecution is "presumefdf' to have vindicated the federal interest).
It is understandable, therefore, that Mr. Sloman might want to retreat from it now.
Indeed, the final Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) restricts the state-court judge
from exercising any of his rightful discretion and to specifically prohibit the judge from
offering probation, community control or any other alternative in lieu of incarceration.
DPA, 1) 2(a).
7. SUGGESTION OF ADDITIONAL STATE PLEA
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• The parties considered: "as suggested by [the defense], a plea to state charges
encompassing Epstein 's conduct." See Tab 1, May 19, 2008 Letter from J. Sloman, p.2,
1 2.
The Truth:
• It was the government, and not the defense, that suggested a plea to state charges to
resolve the federal investigation. Andrew Lourie proposed declining prosecution in favor
of the state. Although Mr. Epstein and the State Attorney 's Office had already reached
a plea agreement, in August 2007, Mr. Sloman and AUSA Marie Villafana warned that
they intended to prosecute Epstein federally unless his counsel (i.e., not the U.S.
Attorney 's Office) sought more stringent conditions to the State's proposed plea
agreement. These stringent conditions included, among other things, the two-year prison
term demanded by Mr. Menchel (discussed above) and a charge requiring him to register
as a sex offender.
RFP MIA 000436
•
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
describes the additional charge to which Mr. Epstein is required to plead guilty
under the Deferred Prosecution Agreement as "procurement of minors to engage
in prostitution " or "solicitation of minors to engage in prostitution ." The former
is an offense for which Mr. Epstein would be required to register, but one for
which the state has no evidence to charge Mr. Epstein and the SDFL refuses or is
unable to provide evidence that it claims it has. The latter requires no
registration, but it is the offense which, over and over again, Ms. Villafana
insisted upon including in the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, and is one which
the State believes is appropriate. The inconsistency between the description of
the offense required by the SDFL , the elements of an offense that can be justified
on the facts of this case and the SDFL 's requirement that the offense be a
registrable one has created substantial confusion.
o As a result of this confusion, in December 2007, both the defense and the state
requested that the SDFL provide the factual allegations to enable Mr. Epstein and
the State to create a truthful factual recitation of a registrable offense required by
the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, but, to date, the SDFL has failed to do so
without any explanation.
• Mr. Sloman refuses to provide the requested factual allegations, which the State cannot
furnish, and now demands a two week deadline to comply. Thus Mr. Sloman has
unreasonably imposed a deadline with which he himself has made it impossible for Mr.
Epstein to comply.
5. WAIVER OF APPEAL TO ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FISHER.
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• "[T]he SDFL provided you with 30 days to appeal the decision to the Assistant Attorney
General of the United States Alice Fisher " and "you chose to forego an appeal to AAG
Fisher."
Id., p. 2.
The Truth:
• Mr. Acosta tolled an August 17 deadline, acknowledging that there were "serious issues"
about the case that needed to be discussed, and scheduled a meeting with the defense for
September 7, 2007. At the September 7, 2007 meeting, with Drew Oosterbaan in
attendance, the government dismissed the defense's objections and set a September 21,
2007 deadline to finalize a non-prosecution agreement or the defense would face an
already-drafted 53-page indictment, purportedly identifying 40 minors , with a guideline
range of 188 months.
• Facing Ms. Villafana 's threatened draconian indictment, without the claimed offer of the
right to raise objections in an appeal to AAG Fisher, the defense chose to negotiate an
RFP MIA 000435
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
evidence that Mr. Epstein routinely and daily receives massages from adults. Only a
small percentage of the masseuses turned out to be minors . The majority of those minors
interviewed by law enforcement admitted to lying directly to Epstein about their ages
(not "unbeknownst to Epstein "), and inventing further false details to substantiate their
lies. Indeed, the civil attorney for several of these women admitted at his recent press
conference that they lied to Mr. Epstein about their ages. Numerous witnesses testified
that Mr. Epstein asked that all masseuses be over the age of 18. Further, the evidence is
undisputed that Mr. Epstein 's assistants scheduled the massages and Mr. Epstein did not
know which masseuses his assistants had scheduled on a particular day, until the massage
took place. We admitted that there was sexual conduct, and argued—not that it was
"innocuous" as Mr. Sloman alleges—but that it was mostly Mr. Epstein 's own self-
pleasuring , which did not satisfy the requisite federal element of criminal sexual conduct
(which is, in turn, defined by state law). These are important distinctions and show that
Mr. Sloman has misrepresented the record about the most basic part of our defense.
4. SLOMAN DEMANDS AN UNREALISTIC DEADLINE TO COMPLY WITH AN
AGREEMENT HE UNILATERALLY MODIFIES.
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• "Unless [Mr. Epstein ] complies with all of the terms and conditions of the [Deferred
Prosecution] Agreement, as modified by the United States Attorney 's December 19,
2007 letter to Ms. Sanchez by close of business on Monday, June 2, 2008, the SDFL will
elect to terminate the Agreement." Id., p.1
The Truth:
• The Deferred Prosecution Agreement was never modified by U.S. Attorney Acosta 's
December 19, 2007 letter. Oddly, Mr. Sloman acknowledges this on page 4 of his May
19 letter, where he writes that Mr. Acosta "proposed" this modification and that "[Mr.
Lefkowitz ] rejected these proposals." Thus, Mr. Sloman is threatening to terminate the
Deferred Prosecution Agreement, unless Mr. Epstein complies with a unilateral
modification that Mr. Sloman concedes was never agreed to by defense counsel.
• Orchestrating the information, plea and sentencing requirements of the Deferred
Prosecution Agreement within the extremely limited two-week timeframe imposed by
Mr. Sloman's June 2, 2008 deadline would have been difficult enough.
• More importantly, as explained below, the SDFL has refused to provide the defense with
information it requires to enable Mr. Epstein to comply with the additional plea and
sentencing requirements of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement (let alone, by the June 2
deadline arbitrarily imposed by Mr. Sloman).
o The Deferred Prosecution Agreement requires Mr. Epstein to plead guilty to and
be sentenced for an additional offense which requires that he be registered as a
sex offender. In different places in his May 19, 2008 letter, Mr. Sloman
RFP MIA 000434
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
See Tab I, May 19, 2008 Letter from J. Sloman, p. 4, 1 1.
The Truth:
• The defense engaged in days of negotiation and made 14 separate substantive objections
to the unprecedented notification letter that Mr. Sloman threatened to send to an
undisclosed list of "victims." The eventual transmission of this highly misleading letter
was only halted by an appeal to AAG Fisher. Among those substantive objections
(which related to far more than the "time and place" of the state's sentencing hearing)
were:
o Sending the letter would contravene the government's commitment to take no
position regarding potential claims of government witnesses . See Tab 39,
November 28, 2008 Email from J. Lefkowitz to J. Sloman.
o The letter cited to an inapplicable statute (the Justice for All Act of 2004) as its
justification for being sent. Id. AUSA Acosta later conceded that the citation to
this statute as a justification was wholly incorrect.
o The letter wrongly advised all recipients that Mr. Epstein would be required to
register as "a sexual predator for the remainder of this life."
o The letter amounted to an invitation to civil litigation against Mr. Epstein ,
advising recipients that they had the right to seek civil damages from Mr. Epstein ,
and in an underlined instruction, stated that if they chose an attorney other than
the one chosen by the government they would be required to pay his fees, but if
they chose the government's choice, Mr. Epstein would be required to pay the
fees.
3. MISCIIARACEERIZATION OF OUR ARGUMENTS.
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• Mr. Sloman's letter misleadingly characterizes our substantive defense of the
government's investigation as, "the investigation merely produced evidence of relatively
innocuous sexual conduct with some minors who, unbeknownst to Mr. Epstein ,
misrepresented their ages."
See Tab I, May 19, 2008 Letter from J. Sloman, p. 2.
The Truth:
• We never made such a claim. To the contrary, we argued that sworn statements we have
taken of the alleged victims demonstrate that law enforcement has presented versions of
their testimony that are necessarily sensationalized and fictionalized. We presented
RFP MIA 000433
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
■ The defense immediately raised concerns regarding the non-independence
of the review when told that it would be Mr. Oosterbaan tasked with
providing the review, but was told that when Mr. Oosterbaan rendered his
prior opinion, "he was not really up to speed on the facts"
o CEOS ' review was not de novo :
• By letter dated May 15, 2008 (four days before Mr. Sloman's letter), Mr.
Oosterbaan advised Mr. Lefkowitz that CEOS reviewed the matter only
for abuse of discretion:
alhe question we sought to answer was whether U.S.
Attorney Acosta would abuse his discretion if he
authorized prosecution in this case.
See Tab 38, May 15, 2008 Letter from D. Oosterbaan, p. I (emphasis
added). See also, id., p. 2 ("Mr. Acosta would not be abusing his
discretion if he decided to pursue such a course of action.'); and p. 5
("Mr. Acosta would not be abusing his prosecutorial discretion should he
authorized federal prosecution of Mr. Epstein .").
• For the factual record of its "abuse of discretion" review, CEOS relied on
the very same prosecution memo that it had already reviewed in rendering
its prior opinion, stating:
As you know, our review of this case is limited, both factually and
legally. We have not looked at the entire universe of facts in this
case.
See Id., p. 1 (emphasis added).
• Nor did CEOS review any facts related to the irregular provisions in the
Deferred Prosecution Agreement or the numerous complaints of
prosecutorial misconduct, both of which are inextricably intertwined with
the impropriety of the investigation. Id. at 1.
2. NOTIFICATION OF WITNESSES .
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• Mr. Sloman dismissed the totality of the defense's objections to the inappropriate
notification the SDFL proposed to send to its witnesses , stating merely that:
"[Y]ou objected to victims['] being notified of time and place of Epstein 's
stateNcourt sentencing hearing."
RFP MIA 000432
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
Response to Letter by FAUSA Sloman Dated May 19, 2008
In a May 19, 2008 letter to Jay Lelkowitz (See Tab I), SDFL First Assistant U.S.
Attorney Jeffrey Sloman provided what purported to be a summary of the events that have
occurred during the investigation of Mr. Epstein . Mr. Sloman's letter is fraught with
inconsistencies, false and misleading characterizations and outright falsehoods. The comparison
below between the false assertions in Mr. Sloman's letter and what actually transpired is only the
tip of the iceberg. We respectfully submit that Mr. Sloman's letter alone demonstrates the
degree to which the record of facts have been distorted and these distortions have permeated this
unprecedented investigation.
1. "INDEPENDENT" AND "DE NOVO " REVIEW.
Mr. Sloman's Letter:
• "[W]e obliged your request for an independent de novo review of the investigation and
facilitated such review at the highest levels of the Department of Justice . " Tab 1, May
19, 2008 Letter from J. Sloman, p. 5, 1 3.
The Truth:
• CEOS ' review, concluded in May 2008, was neither independent nor de novo .
o CEOS ' review was not "independent:"
• Drew Oosterbaan, who conducted the review on behalf of CEOS , had
already reviewed the prosecution memo on this matter eight months
earlier. During a meeting with defense counsel at the United States
Attorney 's Office in Miami (the "USAO ") in September of 2007, he
opined that he so believed in the prosecution that he "would try the case
myself"
• Indeed, Mr. Sloman acknowledges that Mr. Oosterbaan had previously
opined on this matter, stating:
This particular attack on this statute [18 U.S.C. § 2242(b))
had been previously raised and thoroughly considered and
rejected by . . . CEOS prior to the execution of the
[Deferred Prosecution] Agreement [in September 2007].
Id., p. 5 (emphasis added).
• The statute Mr. Sloman referred to (§ 2422(b)) lies at the heart of the
Epstein investigation. Thus, according to Mr. Sloman, Mr. Oosterbaan
was tasked with reviewing his own prior decision regarding applying the
key statute under which the SDFL proposed prosecuting Mr. Epstein .
Exhibit B-37
RFP MIA 000431
Gmail - Fw: confidential communication Page 4 of 4
Letter from CEOS .TIF
360K
Gmail - Fw: confidential communication Page 3 of 4
deliberately lied about their age because they knew Mr. Epstein did not want anyone under 18
in his house directly undercuts the claim that Mr. Epstein willfully blinded himself as to their
ages. Willful blindness is not a substitute for evidence of knowledge nor is it a negligence
standard. It requires proof beyond reasonable doubt of deliberate intent and specific action to
hide one's knowledge. There is absolutely no such evidence of that here, so it is not even a jury
issue. Furthermore, willful ignorance cannot constitute the required mens rea for a crime of
conspiracy or aiding and abetting.
Through the recent witness statements, we have also discovered another serious issue that
implicates the integrity of the federal investigation. We have learned that FBI Special Agent
Kurkendayl attempted to convince these adult women, now in their twenties, that they were in
fact "victims" even though the women themselves strongly disagreed with this characterization.
This conduct, once again, goes to the heart of the integrity of the investigation. Ina sworn
statement, Ms. was highly critical of the overreaching by federal law enforceMent officers
in this case. She testified—in no uncertain terms—that she does not, and never did, feel like a
"victim," despite the fact that the FBI repeatedly tried to convince her otherwise.
I am mindful of the fact that we have a state court date of July 8 on which either to enter a plea
or to commence trial. As I review the trial options with Mr. Epstein , I certainly want to make sure
I do everything within my power to obviate a need for trial through a reasonable alternative
resolution. Although it is clear that CEOS is not directing a prosecution here, and has stated
only that you have the authority to commence such a prosecution, I am well aware that the
decision whether to proceed, subject to any further process in Washington , is now within your
discretion. I think the new facts should greatly influence your decision and accordingly, I hope
you will agree to meet with me, both to discuss the new evidence and to discuss .a resolution to
this matter once and for all: I am available to meet with you at your earliest convenience
subject to our mutual availability.
Respectfully,
Jay._
****** ***** ************ ***** ** **** tr**** ************* ** *****
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 the property of
Kirkland & Ellis LLP or Kirkland & Ellis International LLP.
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
• returrie-mail or by e-mail to postmaster@kirkland.com, and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments.
Gmail - Fw: confidential communication Page 2 of 4
paragraph, that he cannot conclude that a prosecution by you in this case "would be an abuse
of discretion" is hardly an endorsement that you move forward.
Moreover, as you know, Drew made clear that the scope of his review did not extend to the
other significant issues we have raised with you, such as the undo interest by some members of
your staff with the financial and civil aspects of this matter, or with the inappropriate discussion
one member of your Office had with a Senior reporter at the New York Times . (In fact, I have
met with that reporter and have reviewed copious notes of his conversation with Mr. Weinstein ).
At this stage, we have no alternative but to raise our serious concerns regarding the issues
Drew refused to address with the Deputy or, if necessary, the Attorney General , because we
believe those issues have significantly impacted the investigation and any recommendation by
your staff to proceed with an indictment. That being said, it would obviously be much more
constructive and efficient if we could resolve this matter directly with you in the advance of
further proceedings in Washington .
Because it is clear that national policy, as determined by Main Justice, is not driving this case,
the resolution of this matter is squarely, and solely, your responsibility. I know you want to do
the right thing, and it is because you have made clear to me on several occasions that you will
always look at all of the relevant and material fads that I call the following to your attention.
New information that has come to light strongly suggests that the facts of this case cannot
possibly implicate a federal prosecutorial priority. Due to established state procedures and
following the initiation of multiple civil lawsuits, Mr. Epstein 's counsel was able to take limited
discovery of certain women in this matter. The sworn statements provided by these women all
confirm that federal prosecution is not appropriate in this case.
The consistent re resentations of witnesses such as lain
and the civil complainants and their attorneys, con irm e
ollowing key points: First, t ere was no telephonic communication iliet the requirements of
§ 2422(b). For example, as many other witnesses have stated, Ms. testified in no unclear
terms that there was never any discussion over the phone about her coming over to Mr.
_.._____Epstein's home to engage in sexual activity: "The only thing that ever.occurredmi any of these_
phone calls [with Sarah Kellen or another assistant] as 'Are you willing to come over,' or,
'Would you like to come over and give a massage ." Tr. A at 15. Second, the underage
women who visited Mr. Epstein have testified that they lie about their age in order to gain
admittance into his home and women who brought t nderage friends to Mr. Epstein
counseled them to lie about their ages as well. Ms. stated the following: "I would tell my
girlfriends just likelailliapproached me. Make sure you tell him you're 18. Well, these girls
that I brought, I know that they were 18 or 19 or 20. And the girls that I didn't knoll" I don't
know if they were lying or not, I would say' make sure that you tell him you're 18." Tr. at
22. Third, there was no routine or habit suggesting an intent to transform a massage into an
illegal sexual act. For instance, Ms. stated that Mr. Epstein "never touched [her]
phy ' and that all she did was "massage [ ] his back, his chest and his thighs and that was
it." Tr. at 12-13. Finally, as you are well aware, there was no force, coercion , fraud ,
violence, rugs, or even alcohol present in connection with Mr. Epstein 's encounters with these
women.
The civil suits confirm that the plaintiffs did not discuss engaging in sexually-related activities
with anyone prior to arriving at Mr. Epstein 's residence. This reinforces the fact that no
telephonic or Internet persuasion, inducement, enticement or coercion of any kind occurred.
Furthermore, Mr. Herman, the attorney for most of the civil complainants, was quoted in the.
Palm Beach Post as saying that "it doesn't matter" that his clients lied about their ages and told
Mr. Epstein that they were 18 or 19. In short, the new evidence establishing that the women
Gmail - Fw: confidential communication Page 1 of 4
sil Ann Marie Villafana <
Fw: confidential communication
1 message
Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS ) < Ann.Marie.C.Villafana @usdoj.gov> Thu, May 22, 2008 at
3:38 AM
Original Message
From: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS ); Campos, Cyndee (USAFLS ); Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS )
Sent: Mon May 19 12:40:32 2008
Subject: FW: confidential communication
For your records.
From: Jay Lefkowitz [mailto:JLefkowitz@kirkland.com]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 10:54 AM
To: Acosta , Alex (USAFLS )
Subject: confidential communication
Dear Alex:
I am writing to you because I have just received the attached letter from Drew Oosterbaan. In
light of that letter, and given the critical new evidence discussed below, I would like to request a
meeting with you, mindful of our July 8 deadline, at your earliest opportunity. Given your
personal involvement in this matter to date, and the fact that at this juncture it is clear that
CEOS has referred the matter back to you, I respectfully request that you not shunt me off to
one of your staff. You and I have both spent a great deal of time on this matter, and I know that
we both would like to resolve this matter in a way that bestows integrity both on the Department
and the process.
In our prior discussions, you expressed that you were "not unsympathetic" to our various
federalism concerns, but stated that because you serve within the "unitary Executive," you.
believed your hands were tied by Main Justice. You were also extremely gracious in stating that
you did not want the United States to be "unfair". Although CEOS limited its assessment to the
federal statutes your Office had brought forth and to the application of th6se laws to the facts as
presented, it is abundantly clear from Drew's letter that Main Justice is not directing this
prosecution. In fact, CEOS plainly acknowledged that a federal prosecution of Mr. Epstein
would involve a "novel application" of federal statutes and that our arguments against federal
involvement are "compelling." Moreover, the language used by Drew in his concluding
EXHIBIT 6-36
JAY P. LEFKOWITZ , ESQ.
May 19, 2008
PAGE 6 OF 6
Conclusion
On February 25, 2008,1 sent you an e-mail setting forth a timetable for moving forward in
the event that CEOS disagreed with your position. That time is now. As you know, my February 25'
email stated that I would give you one week to comply with the terms and conditions of the
Agreement, as modified by the USA's December Irletter to Ms. Sanchez. In light of the upcoming
Memorial Day weekend, I have decided to extend that timetable to the close of business on Monday,
June 2, 2008, which is a full two weeks.
Sincerely,
R. Alexander Acosta
United States Attorney
By:
Jeffrey H. Sloman
First Assistant United States Attorney
cc: R. Alexander Acosta
United States Attorney
A. Marie Villafana
Assistant U.S. Attorney
Karen Atkinson
Assistant U.S. Attorney
JAY P. LEFKOWITZ , ESQ.
May 19, 2008
PAGE 5 OF 6
C. "Mr. Epstein Does Not Believe He Is Guilty Of The Federal Charges Enumerated
Under Section 2255."
At our December 14, 2007 meeting at the U.S. Attorney 's Office in Miami , counsel for
Epstein announced, inter alia, that it was a "profound injustice" to require Epstein to register as a
sex offender and reiterated that no federal crime, especially 18 U.S.C. Section 2422(6), had been
committed since the statute is only violated if a telephone or means of interstate commerce is used
to do the persuading or inducing. This particular attack on this statute had been previously raised and
thoroughly considered and rejected by the SDFL and CEOS prior to the execution of the Agreement.
You also argued that the facts were inapplicable to the contemplated state statutes and that Epstein
should not have been allowed to have been induced into the Agreement because the facts were not
what he understood them to be, It should be noted that the SDFL has never provided you with any
evidence supportig its investigation. This is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see
North Carolina Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160 (1970)). Ultimately, you requested an
independent review.
Subsequent to the above-mentioned meeting, the SDFL received three letters from you and/or
Mr. Starr which expanded on some of the themes announced in the December 14th meeting.
Essentially, you portrayed the SDFL as trying to coerce a plea to unknown allegations and incoherent
theories. On December 17, 2007, you decreed that Epstein 's conduct did not meet the requirements
of solicitation of minors to engage in prostitution (Fl. Stat. Section 796.03) one of the enumerated
crimes Epstein had previously agreed to plead guilty to; that Epstein 's conduct does not require
registration under Florida law; and the State Attorney 's Office does not believe the conduct is
registrable. On December 21, 2007, you rejected the USA's proposed resolution of the 2255
provision because you "strongly believe that the provable conduct of Mr. Epstein with respect to
these individuals fails to satisfy the requisite elements of either 18 U.S.C. Section[s] 2422(b) ... or
2423(b)." In your December 26, 2007 correspondence you stated that "we have reiterated in
previous submissions that Mr. Epstein does not believe he is guilty of the federal charges enumerated
under section 2255" and requiring "Mr. Epstein to in essence admit guilt, though he believes he did
not commit the requisite offense."
As the SDFL has reiterated time and time again, it does not want, nor does it expect, Epstein
to plead guilty to a charge he does not believe he committed. As a result, we obliged your request
for an independent de novo review of the investigation and facilitated such a review at the highest
levels of the Department of Justice . It is our understanding that that independent review is now
complete and a determination has been made that there are no impediments to a federal prosecution
by the SDFL .
JAY P. LEFKOWITZ , ESQ.
May 19, 2008
PAGE 4 OF 6
B. Method of Compensation and Notification.
During this same time period, you and others, including the former Solicitor General of the
United States Kenneth Starr , took issue with the implementation of the methodology of
compensation (hereinafter "the 2255 provision")) and the SDFL 's intention to notify the victims
under 18 U.S.C. Section 3771 (you objected to victims being notified of time and place of Epstein 's
state court sentencing hearing). In response, the SDFL offered, in my opinion, numerous and various
reasonable modifications and accommodations which ultimately resulted in United States Attorney
IL Alexander Acosta 's December 19, 2007 letter to Lilly Ann Sanchez . In that letter, the United
States Attorney tried to eliminate all concerns which, quite frankly, the SDFL was not obligated to
address, let alone consider. He proposed the following language regarding the 2255 provision:
C
"Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in
Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under
Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein been tried federally and convicted of an
enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall
provide Mr. Epstein 's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in
an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein . Any judicial authority
interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens
if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these
identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been
convicted at trial. No more; no less."
Regarding the issue of notice to the victims, USA Acosta proposed to notify them of the
federal resolution as required by law; however, "[w]e will defer to the discretion of the State
Attorney regarding whether he wishes to provide victims with notice of the state proceedings,
although we will provide him with the information necessary to do so if he wishes." As you know,
you rejected these proposals as well. See December 26, 2007 correspondence from Jay Lefkowitz
to USA Acosta .
3 Prior to any issues arising concerning the implementation of the 2255 provision, the SDFL
unilaterally agreed to assign its responsibility to select the attorney representative for the alleged victims
to an independent third-party. This was done to avoid even the appearance of favoritism in the selection
of the attorney representative. As a result, on October 29, 2007, the parties executed an Addendum
wherein it was mutually agreed that former States District Court Judge Edward B. would
serve as the independent third-party. Judge selected the venerable law firm of Podh r nd
Josefsberg to represent the approximately 34 a eged identified victims.
JAY P. LEFKOWITZ , ESQ.
May 19, 2008
PAGE 3 OF 6
of the guilty plea and sentence no later than October 26, 2007; and (5) the start of the above-
mentioned sentence no later than January 4, 2008.
Furthermore, and significantly, Epstein agreed that he had the burden of ensuring compliance
of the Agreement with the Palm Beach County State Attorney 's Office and the Judge of the 15*
Judicial Circuit and "that the failure to do so will be a breach of the agreement" (emphasis added).
Post-Execution of the Agreement
Within weeks of the execution of the Agreement, you sought to delay the entry of Epstein 's
guilty plea and sentence. After the SDFL agreed to accommodate your request, counsel for Epstein
began taking issue with the methodology of compensation, notification to the victims, and the issues
that had been previously considered and 'ejected during negotiations, i.e., that the conduct does not
require registration and the contemplated state and federal statutes have no applicability to the instant
matter.
A. Delay.
The Agreement required that "Epstein shall use his best efforts to enter his guilty plea and
be sentenced not later than October 26, 2007. The United States has no objection to Epstein self-
reporting to begin serving his sentence not later than January 4, 2008." Agreement, pages 4-5,
paragraph I 1 (emphasis added). After the Agreement was executed, the SDFL accommodated your
request to extend the October 26th plea deadline to November 20'° based upon, what seemed to be,
reasonable scheduling conflict issues.' By early November, you represented that the presiding state
court judge would not "stagger the plea and sentencing as contemplated in the Agreement."Although
the Agreement clearly did not contemplate a staggered "plea and sentencing," the SDFL again agreed
to accommodate Epstein 's request to appear in state court for plea and sentencing on January 4,
2008.2
I "Accordingly, I have now confirmed with Mr. Epstein 's Florida counsel that the state's
attomey's office and the court will be available to have him enter his plea on November 20. So we will
plan to proceed on one that date." October 18, 2007 email from Jay Lefkowitz to USA R. Alexander
Acosta .
On the same day, Mr. Lefkowitz confirmed with First Assistant Jeffrey H. Sloman that this
postponement " will not affect when Epstein begins serving his sentence."
2 Correspondence from Jay Lefkowitz to FAUSA Sloman dated November 8, 2007 ("the judge
has invited the parties to appear for the plea and sentencing on January 4*, we do not anticipate any delay
beyond that date.")
JAY P. LEFKOWITZ , ESQ.
May 19, 2008
PAGE 2 OF 6
Background
The Agreement was the product of months of negotiations. Specifically, you requested and
received numerous meetings, at the highest levels of the SDFL and DOJ 's Child Exploitation and
Obscenity Section (CEOS ) concerning claims that (a) the investigation merely produced evidence
of relatively innocuous sexual conduct with some minors who, unbeknownst to Epstein ,
misrepresented their ages; (b) the authorities investigating Epstein engaged in misconduct; (c) the
contemplated federal statutes have no applicability to this matter; and (d) the federal authorities
disregarded the fundamental policy against federal intervention with state criminal proceedings.
After careful review, the SDFL ultimately rejected those claims. Subsequent to its decision, however,
but before proceeding any further, the SDFL provided you with 30 days to appeal the decision to the
Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Alice Fisher . As you recall, you chose to forego an
appeal to AAG Fisher, and instead pursued a negotiated resolution which, ultimately, resulted in the
execution of the Agreement.
The Negotiation Phase
During negotiations, you tried to avoid a resolution that called for incarceration and
registration as a sexual offender — both of which would be triggered by a successful federal
prosecution. The SDFL believed and continues to believe that should this matter proceed to trial,
your client would be convicted of the federal statutes identified in the Agreement. In order to achieve
a global resolution, the SDFL indicated a willingness to defer to the State the length of incarceration;
however, it remained adamant that Epstein register as a sex offender and that all victims identified
during the investigation remain eligible for compensation. In order to achieve this result, the parties
considered two alternatives, a plea to federal charges that limited Epstein 's sentencing exposure, or,
as suggested by you, a plea to state charges encompassing Epstein 's conduct. Ultimately, the parties
agreed to, inter cilia, a plea to the state charges outlined in the Agreement, registration and a method
of compensation.
The Agreement
The crux of the Agreement defers in favor of the State federal prosecution of Epstein for his
sexual conduct involving those minor victims identified as of September 24, 2007, in exchange for
a guilty plea to a state offense that requires registration as a sex offender; a sufficient term of
imprisonment; and a method of compensation for the victims such that they would be placed in the
same position as if Epstein had been convicted of one of the enumerated offenses set forth in Title
18, United States Code, Section 2255. Specifically, the Agreement mandates, inter cilia, (1) a guilty
plea in Palm Beach County Circuit Court to solicitation of prostitution (Fl. Stat. Section 796.07) and
procurement of minors to engage in prostitution (Fl. Stat. Section 796.03) (an offense that requires
him to register as a sex offender); (2) a 30-month sentence including 18 months' incarceration in
county jail; (3) a methodology to compensate the victims identified by the United States; (4) entry
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of Florida
Fern Assistant U.S. Attorney
DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE
Jay P. Lefkowitz , Esq.
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Citigroup Center
153 East 53rd Street
New York, New York 10022-4675
Re: Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. Lefkowitz ,
99 N.E. 4 Street
Miami . FL 33132
On 961.9110
May 19, 2008
I am in receipt of your e-mail dated May 19, 2008 to the United States Attorney . The U.S.
Attorney would like me to advise you that all communications and inquiries related to the Epstein
matter, will be handled by AUSA Marie Villafana and/or her supervisor, Karen Atkinson, so he does
not intend to respond to your e-mail or calls unless AUSA Villafana and/or her supervisors advise
him otherwise. Furthermore, you make reference to "our July 8 deadline." Respectfully, the United
States Attorney 's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("SDFL ") has never agreed to any such
deadline. Should you decide to provide the SDFL with any additional information, please do so
through AUSA Villafana , and, in her absence, AUSA Atkinson.
On September 24, 2007, your client, Jeffrey Epstein , in consultation with Gerald Lefcoun,
Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez , Esq., as well as numerous other nationally-renowned lawyers , including
but not limited to Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz , former Independent Counsel and
Solicitor General of the United States Kenneth Starr , just to name a few, entered into a global
resolution of state and federal liabilities faced by your client ("the Agreement") with the SDFL .
Although you and other members of the defense team have since claimed that the Agreement was
the product of adhesion, the following facts demonstrate that Epstein knowingly and voluntarily
entered into the Agreement in order to avoid a federal indictment regarding his sexual conduct
involving minor victims . Despite the fact that by signing the Agreement, Epstein gave up the right
to object to its provisions, the SDFL bent over backwards to exhaustively consider and re-consider
your objections. Since these objections have finally been exhausted and Epstein has previously
expressed his intent to not comply with several of the terms and conditions of the Agreement as set
forth below, the SDFL hereby notifies you that unless he complies with all of the terms and
conditions of the Agreement, as modified by the United States Attorney 's December 19, 2007 letter
to Ms. Sanchez by close of business on Monday, June 2, 2008, the SDFL will elect to terminate the
Agreement.
05/19/08 MON 15:50 FAX 305 530 6440 EXECUTIVE OFFICE IiM001
TRANSMISSION OK
********smss*******
*s* TX REPORT *as
4444441:4444**********
TX/RX NO 3494
CONNECTION TEL 912124464900
SUBADDRESS
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME 05/19 15:47
USAGE T 03'03
PGS. 7
RESULT OK
U.S. Department of Justice
United Stoles Attorney
Southern District of Florida
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 'S OFFICE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
99 NE 4" STREET
MIAMI , FLORIDA 33132-2111
Jeffrey H. Sloman
First Assistant U.S. Attorney
305 961 9299
Cyndee Campos
Staff Assistant
305 961 9461
305 530-6444 fax
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
COVER SHEET
DATE: May 19, 2008
TO: Jay P. Lefkowitz , Esquire
FAX NUMBER:
SUBJECT: Epstein
NUMBER OF PAGES, INCLUDING THIS PAGE: 7