Epstein Secrets

ys in which they have tried to breach the agreement to convince you guys to let me indict.” In Washington, D.C., Lourie consulted with CEOS Chief Oosterbaan, asking for his thoughts on defense counsel’s arguments. At the same time, at Lourie’s request, Villafaña sent the NPA and its addendum to Lourie

upport the prosecution.” On March 6, 2008, Acosta alerted Sloman and Oosterbaan that Starr and Lefkowitz had called him to express “concern” about Oosterbaan’s participation in the case, and indicated that “they may ask for more senior involvement.” Acosta “informed them that they certainly had the righ

omplaints, and asked her to meet with him, Lefkowitz, and Whitley. Meanwhile, Oosterbaan’s Deputy Chief drafted a decision letter to be sent from Oosterbaan to Lefkowitz, and over the course of several weeks, it was reviewed by and received input from Deputy Assistant Attorney General Mandelker and Assi

he prosecutor harbors a good faith doubt, based on either the law or the evidence, as to the government’s ability to prove the charge at trial. The Ashcroft Memo explains that the “basic policy” “requires federal prosecutors to charge and pursue all charges that are determined to be readily provable” an

t despite Oosterbaan’s favorable opinion of the case, “[t]his was . . . a bit of uncharted territory,” involving facts that were unlike the case law Oosterbaan had cited. Although Lourie had some concerns about the legal issues and about the witnesses, he “probably” did not see any impediment to going for

d in the case and describing it as a “highly sensitive” case involving “a high profile, very rich defendant.”39 After CEOS reviewed the materials, Oosterbaan responded to Lourie with an email stating that the memorandum was “exhaustive” and “well done” and noting that Villafaña “has correctly focused on

u know is completely unacceptable to the FBI, ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement], the victims, and me. These plea negotiations violate the Ashcroft memo, the U.S. Attorney[s’] Manual, and all of the various iterations of the victims’ rights legislation. Strategically, you have started the plea

time, Epstein's attorneys advised that an agreement involving jail time would not be acceptable. On August 31, 2007, the FBI agents and I met with Drew Oosterbaan, Chief of the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, to discuss the evidence and theory of the prosecution. Ile had previously been provided wit

de clear that "Twombly expounded the pleading standard for 'all civil actions' and not just pleadings made in the context of an antitrust dispute," Ashcroft'. Iqbal No. 07-1015 (U.S. May 18, 2009) (slip op. at 20) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 1), the need to enforce these pleading requirements is especially

lying with certain parts of the NPA. OPR Report at 95. According to the report: me time, at [USAO-SDFL supervisor sent the NPA and its addendum t Oosterbaan responded to Lourie that he was "not thrilled" about the NPA; described Epstein's conduct as unusually "egregious," particularly because of its ser

U.S. 461 (1997) 200 Kungvs v. United States, 485 U.S. 759 (1988) 222 Landgralv. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 (1994) 35,36,41,42 Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (2004) 56, 57 Madanes v. Madanes, 186 F.R.D. 279 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) 141 Martindell v. Intl Tel. and Tel Coup., 594 F.2d 291 (2d Cir.

95. According to the report: At the same time, at [USAO-SDFL supervisor] Lourie's request, Villafafta sent the NPA and its addendum to Lourie and Oosterbaan. Oosterbaan responded to Lourie that he was "not thrilled" about the NPA; described Epstein's conduct as unusually "egregious," particularly becau

S. 461 (1997) 200 Kungys v. United States, 485 U.S. 759 (1988) 222 Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 (1994) 35,36, 41, 42 Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (2004) 56, 57 Madanes v. Madanes, 186 F.R.D. 279 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) 141 Martindell v. Intl Tel. and Tel. Corp., 594 F.2d 291 (2d Cir.

95. According to the report: At the same time, at [USAO-SDFL supervisor] Lourie's request, Villafafta sent the NPA and its addendum to Lourie and Oosterbaan. Oosterbaan responded to Lourie that he was "not thrilled" about the NPA; described Epstein's conduct as unusually "egregious," particularly becau

S. 461 (1997) 200 Kungys v. United States, 485 U.S. 759 (1988) 222 Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 (1994) 35,36, 41, 42 Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (2004) 56, 57 Madanes v. Madanes, 186 F.R.D. 279 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) 141 Martindell v. Intl Tel. and Tel. Corp., 594 F.2d 291 (2d Cir.

95. According to the report: At the same time, at [USAO-SDFL supervisor] Lourie's request, Villafafta sent the NPA and its addendum to Lourie and Oosterbaan. Oosterbaan responded to Lourie that he was "not thrilled" about the NPA; described Epstein's conduct as unusually "egregious," particularly becau

ungys v. United States, 485 U.S. 759 (1988) Landgraf v. US! Film Products, 148 511 U.S. 244 (1994) 27 Landgraf, 511 U.S 27, 30, 32 Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (2004) 40 Lighte, 782 F.3d 120 Madanes v. Madanes, 186 F.R.D. 279 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) 98 Martindell v. Intl Tel. and Tel. Corp., 59

95. According to the report: At the same time, at [USAO-SDFL supervisor] Lourie's request, Villafaiia sent the NPA and its addendum to Lourie and Oosterbaan. Oosterbaan responded to Lourie that he was "not thrilled" about the NPA; described Epstein's conduct as unusually "egregious," particularly becau

U.S. 461 (1997) 200 Kungys v. United States, 485 U.S. 759 (1988) 222 Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 (1994) 35,36,41,42 Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (2004) 56, 57 Madanes v. Madanes, 186 F.R.D. 279 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) 141 Martindell v. Intl Tel. and Tel. Corp., 594 F.2d 291 (2d Cir

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 S

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 Cr

ing the state to do a little bit more. 21 Q MM-hmm. All right. Did you have any discussions 22 about whether this disposition comported with the Ashcroft 23 memo in that you were hunting to the state for a minor 24 charge, for a fairly minor charge, what you -- your office 25 had already understo

ing the state to do a little bit more. 21 Q MM-hmm. All right. Did you have any discussions 22 about whether this disposition comported with the Ashcroft 23 memo in that you were hunting to the state for a minor 24 charge, for a fairly minor charge, what you -- your office 25 had already understo

ing the state to do a little bit more. 21 Q MM-hmm. All right. Did you have any discussions 22 about whether this disposition comported with the Ashcroft 23 memo in that you were hunting to the state for a minor 24 charge, for a fairly minor charge, what you -- your office 25 had already understo

Fair. I remember it was Starr and Lefkowitz. I 18 don't know if it was Lilly Ann. 19 Q All right, and our information is it was you, Drew 20 Oosterbaan, Sloman, , and John MacMillan. Do you -- 21 do you know John MacMillan? 22 A Vaguely. 23 Q All right. He was an AUSA as well. 24 A Right.

etting Drew into the meeting was to not have them 6 appeal us, and then having Drew say, not a good case. 7 Q All right. So, were you aware that Drew Oosterbaan 8 had, in preparation for this, gone to West Palm and actually 9 gone through the evidence and met with the case agent and the 10 line AUSA 11

etting Drew into the meeting was to not have them 6 appeal us, and then having Drew say, not a good case. 7 Q All right. So, were you aware that Drew Oosterbaan 8 had, in preparation for this, gone to West Palm and actually 9 gone through the evidence and met with the case agent and the 10 line AUSA 11

etting Drew into the meeting was to not have them 6 appeal us, and then having Drew say, not a good case. 7 Q All right. So, were you aware that Drew Oosterbaan 8 had, in preparation for this, gone to West Palm and actually 9 gone through the evidence and met with the case agent and the 10 line AUSA 11

Fair. I remember it was Starr and Lefkowitz. I 18 don't know if it was Lilly Ann. 19 Q All right, and our information is it was you, Drew 20 Oosterbaan, Sloman, , and John MacMillan. Do you -- 21 do you know John MacMillan? 22 A Vaguely. 23 Q All right. He was an AUSA as well. 24 A Right.

Fair. I remember it was Starr and Lefkowitz. I 18 don't know if it was Lilly Ann. 19 Q All right, and our information is it was you, Drew 20 Oosterbaan, Sloman, , and John MacMillan. Do you -- 21 do you know John MacMillan? 22 A Vaguely. 23 Q All right. He was an AUSA as well. 24 A Right.