Epstein Secrets

e in the West Palm Beach Division of the Southern District of Florida, for making misrepresentations during a prior sentencing proceeding. In fact, Stephanie Thacker, a former deputy to CEOS Chief Drew Oosterbaan, has stated that she knew of no other case like this being prosecuted by CEOS. 3 EFTA00731148 12.

rospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys.' Not surprisingly, Ms. issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice

es regarding coordination with .sale &authorities had been fidlowed. gave no response other than stating. "it is none of your concern:* 7 In fact. Stephanie Thacker. a former deputy to Drew Osterbahm, has stated that she knew of no other case like this heing prosecuted by ('EOS. With that in mind, we welcome the

rospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys.' Not surprisingly, Ms. issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice

e in the West Palm Beach Division of the Southern District of Florida, for making misrepresentations during a prior sentencing proceeding. In fact, Stephanie Thacker, a former deputy to CEOS Chief Drew Oosterbaan, has stated that she knew of no other case like this being prosecuted by CEOS. 3 08-80736-CV-MARRA

prospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys) Not surprisingly, Ms. issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice

n the West Palm Beach Division of the Southern District of Florida, for making misrepresentations during a prior sentencing proceeding. 3 In fact, Stephanie Thacker, a former deputy to CEOS Chief has stated that she knew of no other case like this being prosecuted by CEOS. 3 EFTA00210065 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LL

rospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys.' Not surprisingly, Ms. issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice

bmissions include: a summary of the irregularities and misconduct that occurred during the federal investigation; a letter from former CEOS attorney Stephanie Thacker that responds to CEOS's assessment of its limited review of Mr. E stein's case; and a point-by- point rebuttal to First Assistant United States Atto

ll prospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys.' Not surprisingly, issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice

n the West Palm Beach Division of the Southern District of Florida, for making misrepresentations during a prior sentencing proceeding. 3 In fact, Stephanie Thacker, a former deputy to CEOS Chief Drew Oosterbaan, has stated that she knew of no other case like this being prosecuted by CEOS. 3 EFTA00067355 KIR

rospective witnesses, Mr. Epstein and his attorneys.' Not surprisingly, Ms. issued this subpoena without the requisite prior approval by the DOJ's Office of Enforcement Operations. See United States Attorneys' Manual, § 9-13.410. When confronted, she misleadingly responded that she had consulted with the Department of Justice