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

I and I looked into this and do not believe that any of it is true.” Villafaña told OPR that the rumor that Epstein had cooperated with the case in New York was “completely false.” Acosta told OPR that he did not have any information about Epstein cooperating in a financial investigation or relating to

ry 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 feder

hel 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

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

, Chief, Criminal Division Rolando Garcia, Deputy Chief, Criminal Division Karen Atkinson, Chief, Northern Region From: cc: A. Marie Villafafia Drew Oosterbaan Myesha Braden INTRODUCTION This third supplement summarizes the changes to the indictment and prosecution memo since the first presentation in Ma

8 U.S.C. § 2423(b). Jane Does #1 through #19 were all minors at the time of their involvement with defendant Epstein. Jane Doe #11 was a resident of New York; the remaining Jane Does were all residents of Palm Beach County, Florida, at the time of their involvement with defendant Epstein. Count 1 carries