Epstein Secrets

r Deputy Assistant Attorney General Andrew Oosterbaan Chief, CEOS Office of the Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip Deputy Attorney General John Roth Senior Associate Deputy Attorney General A. February - May 15, 2008: Review by CEOS and the Criminal Division On Febrnaiy 21, 2008, soon after

the defense and State Attorney’s Office, or at least indicated agreement pending Acosta’s approval. In any event, whatever the level of Sloman’s, Menchel’s, Lourie’s, and Villafaña’s involvement, they acted with the knowledge and approval of Acosta. Under OPR’s analytical framework, an attorney who

n, Lourie, and Villafaña were involved in the matter to varying degrees, at 134 different points in time, and regarding different decisions. Menchel, for example, participated in formulating the USAO’s initial written offer to the defense, but he had no involvement with actions or decisions made

so Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1). 206 OPR also considered whether Acosta, Sloman, Menchel, Lourie, or Villafaña failed to comply with professional ethics standards requiring that attorneys exercise competence and diligence in their repres

tter to DAG B-127 6/3/2008 I lonorable Mark Filip, DAG Kenneth Starr Submission with documents for independent review 6/3/2008 Starr/\Vhitley John Roth Letter - 1 page 6/3/2008 Honorable Mark Filip, DAG Sloman 2nd draft letter to DAG B-123 6/3/2008 Draft letter to Deputy Attorney General Mar

ial EFTA00224947 EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION TIMELINE Date To From Re: Exhibit # 5/18/2007 Matthew Menchel A. Marie Villafana 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

6/18/2007 Subpoena to NES, LLC (return date 7/10/07) 6/21/2007 Matthew Menchel A. Marie Villafalia Email re Meeting next week with emails from Menchel to Villafalia (6/21/07) and Villafaria to Menchel (6/21/07) attached ll 6/22/2007 Subpoena to Guys and Dolls (return date 7/10/07) 6/25/2007 Je

tten attorney (Lourie) notes 1 I 7/13/2007 Matthew Menchel A. Marie Villafaria Email re Epstein with email from Menchel (7/5/07), Villafana to Menchel (7/4/07) and Sloman to Villafatia (7/3/07) attached 7/16/2007 Black Villafaria Response to letter regarding subpoena to Paul Lavery for computer

chard 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

al EFTA00225432 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

ding 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 39 7/81/07- 8/3/07 7/31/2007.8/3/2007 Entails between Jeff Montan, Matt Moretti, Andrew Louric, and Marie VilLafaria regarding pl

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

258 CEOS Chief Oosterbaan told OPR this provision was “very unusual.” Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General John Roth commented, “I don’t know how it is that you give immunity to somebody who’s not identified. I just don’t know how that works.” Villafaña’s co-coun

efforts to obtain the missing computers, but he believed that “there was a desire to move quickly as opposed to slowly” regarding the plea. Menchel, Sloman, and Lourie also all told OPR that they did not remember Villafaña’s efforts to obtain the computers or recalled the issue only “vaguely.”

th the USAO’s demand for the equipment. In late June 2007, defense attorney Sanchez requested an extension of time to comply; in informing Sloman, Menchel, and Lourie of the request, Villafaña stressed that “we want to get the computer equipment that was removed from Epstein’s home prior to the state s

ded to Acosta charging Epstein by criminal complaint and offering a plea to conspiracy “to make a plea attractive.” Similarly, before learning that Menchel had already discussed a state-based resolution with Epstein’s counsel, Villafaña had considered offering Epstein a plea to one count of conspiracy

in Illicit Sexual Conduct) Pages 1-6 (of 7 pages) of Non-Prosecution Agreement with highlighted portions Brown file folder with 6/23/08 letter from John Roth (DAG) to Lefkowitz and Starr; 11/2/2010 Privileged Communication letter re Litigation Hold; clipped Non-Prosecution Agreement Doe IM) v. Epstein, 0

Sloman & Lourie; 7/6/07 Lefcourt & Dershowitz to Sloman; 7/25/07 Lefcourt & Dershowitz to Menchel; 8/2/07 EFTA00066350 Sanchez to Menchel; 8/3/07 Menchel to Sanchez; 9/17/07 to Lekowitz; 10/25/07 Sloman Itr to Davis; 11/8/07 Lefkowitz to Sloman; 11/13/07 Sloman to Lefkowitz (was this sent?); 11/28/07

court to Lourie; 6/18/07 to Lefcourt; 6/25/07 Lefcourt to Sloman & Lourie; 7/6/07 Lefcourt & Dershowitz to Sloman; 7/25/07 Lefcourt & Dershowitz to Menchel; 8/2/07 EFTA00066350 Sanchez to Menchel; 8/3/07 Menchel to Sanchez; 9/17/07 to Lekowitz; 10/25/07 Sloman Itr to Davis; 11/8/07 Lefkowitz to Slom

Madly (213) 680-8440 [email protected] 777 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, California 90017 (213)680'8400 www.kirkland.com June 19,2008 John Roth, Esq. Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Office of the Deputy Attorney General United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Aven

d Epstein's sentencing exposure . . . " See Tab 1, May 19, 2008 Letter from J. . In fact, by a email dated August 3, 2007, Criminal Division Chief Matthew Menchel advised the defense that the federal government required a minimum term of two years of incarceration. See Tab 40, August 3, 2007 Email from M. Men

Tracking: EFTA00194199 EFTA00194200 you do decide to send us something, it would be most useful to get it by the middle of next week. Thanks. John Roth Associate Deputy Attorney General (202) 307-2090 **********************###*****************####************* The information contained in this co

Karen (USAFLS) Subject JE I am just reading through all of the new submissions. I don't know which makes me angrier, all of the blatant lies, or Matt Menchel telling them (Lilly, no doubt), that I am "unsupervisable." Jeff, I'm sorry I got you into this. On another, ironic, note. Today, Epstein's lawyers

May 28, 2008 4:51 p.m., RE: Jeffrey Epstein (1 page) Letter to Kenneth Starr and Joe D. Whitley, dated June 3, 2008, No Subject (1 page), Author: John Roth, Senior Associate Deputy Attorney General Letter to John Roth, Senior Associate Deputy Attorney General, dated June 19, 2008, No Subject (14 pages

, 2007 (82 pages), Author: A. Marie Villafana. Addressees: R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney; Jeff Sloman, First Assistant U.S. Attorney; Matthew Menchel, Chief, Criminal Division; Andrew Lourie; Managing Assistant U.S. Attorney, Northern Region; and Karen Atkinson, Chief, Northern Region. (P). Draf

r. Epstein's alleged conduct. See Lefcourt Letter (Exhibit 1); see also Letter from Stephanie D. Thacker, former Principal Deputy Chief of CEOS, to John Roth, Senior Associate Deputy Attorney General, June 19, 2008 (attached as Exhibit ) (noting that "[t]his is a case about purely local activity, involv

rs with outstanding reputations, including but not limited to: R. Alexander Acosta (U.S. Attorney), Jeffrey Sloman (First Assistant U.S. Attorney), Matthew Menchel (Chief, Criminal Division), Andrew Lourie (Deputy Chief, Northern Region), and AUSA Anna Marie Villafana. Mr. Epstein retained counsel with experti

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 immed

ussed 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