Epstein Secrets

fyi From: Lourie, Andrew (USAFLS) Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:32 PM To: 'Gerald Lefcourt' Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein I have your letter. I think we are on the

LEFKOWFIZ, ESQ. , 2008 PAGE 2 OF 5 Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Mice Fisher. As you recall, you chose to forego an appeal to AAG Fisher, and instead pursued a negotiated resolution which, ultimately, resulted in the execution of the Agreement. The Negotiation Phase During negotiati

so the plea agreement would have had to be a binding plea pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C), which is what I drafted. I was informed by Mr. Lourie that USA Acosta did not want to do a (c)(1)(C) plea, so I had to find charges that would result in a two-year statutory maximum. This resulted in m

ons under the terms of the NPA. I then worked to find pro bono counsel for those victims (Exhibit B-23). On May 15, 2008, CEOS, DAAG Mandelker, and AAG Fisher completed their review, finding that our case against Epstein was neither improper nor inappropriate (Exhibit B-24). By that time, a revised indict

tember 24, 2007 Email from J. Lefkowitz to M. Villafana. 22. Ms. Villafana replied that she had “forwarded your message only to Alex [Acosta], Andy [Lourie], and Rolando [Garcia]. I don’t anticipate it going any further than that.” Jd. 23. Ms. Villafana stated that the agreement would be “placed in the

an threatened to send to an undisclosed list of “victims.” The eventual transmission of this highly misleading letter was only halted by an appeal to AAG Fisher. Among those substantive objections (which related to far more than the “time and place” of the state’s sentencing hearing) were: o Sending the lett

of 188 months. e Facing Ms. Villafana’s threatened draconian indictment, without the claimed offer of the right to raise objections in an appeal to AAG Fisher, the defense chose to negotiate an HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012176 --- PAGE BREAK --- KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Agreement to Defer Prosecution to the State, an