Epstein Secrets

represented parties who must be contacted only through their counsel. Your concerns regarding the § 2255 litigation are unfounded. As you know, Mr. Ocariz had been told that he would be the attorney representative for the victims. As a matter of professional courtesy, he was informed that the Office d

bout Mr. Epstein's lawyer's statement that someone from our Office told them that "we are ready to pull the trigger." 13After reviewing his e-mail, AUSA Weinstein discussed the matter with U.S. Attorney Acosta. Pursuant to USAM 1-7.530 and the Media Relations Guide, Section 111 D2, after consultation with and

y. Confidential and Privileged — Attorney Work Product -9- Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-013382 EFTA00230287 A. The Morning ofJanuary 2, 2008. AUSA Weinstein began his conversation with Mr. Thomas by explaining that he was the acting PIO for the week and that he had received Mr.Thomas's December 31, 2007

nt the unnamed women in claims against Epstein). 26. The next day, AUSA advised the defense that she was removing one of the alternatives to Mr. Ocariz from our consideration, on the basis that "one of his partners is married to an AUSA here," and explained that, because of that personal relationshi

ted differently than anyone else. Mr. Thomas apparently stated that he understood that there was evidence that the women had lied about their ages. AUSA Weinstein replied that this was not a defense and that Mr. Thomas should not believe "the spin" of Mr. Epstein's "high-priced attorneys." Indeed, Mr. Weinste

the unnamed women in claims against Epstein). The next day, AUSA Villafana advised the defense that she was removing one of the alternatives to Mr. Ocariz from our consideration, on the basis that “one of his partners is married to an AUSA here,” and explained that, because of that personal relationship

hed” him (in the words of Mr. Thomas) for disclosing the contents of their prior conversation to the defense, and strongly “reminded” Mr. Thomas that AUSA Weinstein’s prior comments about Mr. Epstein had only been “hypothetical” in nature. That claim is sheer nonsense: AUSA Weinstein had disclosed specific details