Epstein Secrets

approval) promised to close the money-laundering investigation "if the sex offense case is resolved." See Tab 23, August 16, 2007 Letter from M. to G. Lefcourt ("In other words, if the sex offense case is resolved, the Office would close its investigation into other areas as well. The matter has not been,

eral charges that limited 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,

approval) promised to close the money-laundering investigation "if the sex offense case is resolved." See Tab 23, August 16, 2007 Letter from M. to G. Lefcourt ("In other words, if the sex offense case is resolved, the Office would close its investigation into other areas as well. The matter has not been,

eral charges that limited 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,

y approval) promised to close the money-laundering investi ati n "if the sex offense case is resolved." See Tab 23, August 16, 2007 Letter from to G. Lefcourt ("In other words, if the sex offense case is resolved, the Office would close its investigation into other areas as well. The matter has not been,

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

l) promised to close the money-laundering investigation only "if the sex offense case is resolved." See August 16, 2007 Letter from M. Villafana to G. Lefcourt ("In other words, if the sex offense case is resolved, the Office would close its investigation into other areas as well. The matter has not been,

hat her subpoena sought.' As a weak explanation of the many complaints about Ms. Villafana's misconduct and her flagrant violations of the USAM, her Criminal Division Chief, Matthew Menchel, eventually characterized her as "unsupervisable." In August 2007, Ms. Villafana demanded that, in exchange for a deferral o

y approval) promised to close the money-laundering investigation "if the sex offense case is resolved." See Tab 23, August 16, 2007 Letter from to G. Lefcourt ("In other words, if the sex offense case is resolved, the Office would close its investigation into other areas as well. The matter has not been,

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

approval) promised to close the money-laundering investigation "if the sex offense case is resolved." See Tab 23, August 16, 2007 Letter from,. to G. Lefcourt ("In other words, if the sex offense case is resolved, the Office would close its investigation into other areas as well. The matter has not been,

a plea to federal charges that limited Epstein's sentencing exposure . . . " See Tab 1, May 19, 2008 Le In fact, by a email dated August 3, 2007, Criminal Division Chief advised the defense that the federal government required a • o two years of incarceration. See Tab 40, August 3, 2007 Email fro Subsequen

/18/08 Lefkowitz Ltr to AMCV" containing handwritten draft notes for proposed letter to J. Lefkowitz; 5/22/07 e-mail from to M. re meeting with G. Lefcourt with attached email from G. Lefcourt re solicitation for meetings Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Suppl. Box #3 P-013304 Thru P-013325

prosecution agreement" and "called a time-out." At that time, Acosta asked the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section of the Justice Department's Criminal Division, located in Washington, D.C., to look at the case.l°6 CONCEALING THE NPA WHILE EPSTEIN SOUGHT REVIEW 92. Following the entry of the "time out," any

) promised to close the money-laundering investigation “if the sex offense case is resolved.” See Tab 23, August 16, 2007 Letter from M. Villafana to G. Lefcourt (“In other words, if the sex offense case is resolved, the Office would close its investigation into other areas as well. The matter has not been, an

our review of this case is limited both factually and legally. We have not looked at the entire universe of facts in this case. It is not the role of the Criminal Division to conduct a complete factual inquiry from scratch.” (CEOS letter at p. 1). Indeed, entire subject areas relevant to the inquiry were not considered