Epstein Secrets

ess concerns." See December 19, 2007 Letter from U.S. Attorney Acosta to Attorney Lilly Ann Sanchez at pg 3. He also stated that he had spoken with AAG Fisher to ask that she review this matter and to expedite the process. Id. • In the beginning of January, 2008, Mr. Acosta and I discussed the need for f

oth unreasonable and unjustifiable to hold Mr. Epstein responsibleaseribe blame to Mr. Epstein never mind declare him in breach—with regard to Judge McSorley's nunc pro tunc order. June 15 Letter at 3. Frankly, I am confused as to how you could do so. Neither Mr. Epstein ,nor defense counsel had anything

erns." See Exhibit 6, December 19, 2007 Letter from U.S. Attorney Acosta to Attorney Lilly Ann Sanchez at 3. He also stated that he had spoken with AAG Fisher to ask that she review this matter and to expedite the process. Id. • In the beginning of January, 2008, Mr. Acosta and I discussed the need for f

ppropriate. Eighth, it is both unreasonable and unjustifiable to hold Mr. Epstein responsible—never mind declare him in breach—with regard to Judge McSorley's nunc pro tune order. Exhibit 1, June 15, 2009 Letter at 3. Neither Mr. Epstein nor defense counsel had anything to do with and certainly no prior

erns." See Exhibit 6, December 19, 2007 Letter from U.S. Attorney Acosta to Attorney Lilly Ann Sanchez at 3. He also stated that he had spoken with AAG Fisher to ask that she review this matter and to expedite the process. Id. • In the beginning of January, 2008, Mr. Acosta and I discussed the need for fu

ppropriate. Eighth, it is both unreasonable and unjustifiable to hold Mr. Epstein responsible—never mind declare him in breach—with regard to Judge McSorley's nunc pro tune order. Exhibit 1, June 15, 2009 Letter at 3. Neither Mr. Epstein nor defense counsel had anything to do with and certainly no prior

oncerns." See Exhibit 6, December 19, 2007 Letter from U.S. Attorney Acosta to Attorney Lilly Sanchez at 3. He also stated that he had spoken with AAG Fisher to ask that she review this matter and to expedite the process. Id. • In the beginning of January, 2008, Mr. Acosta and I discussed the need for f

ppropriate. Eighth, it is both unreasonable and unjustifiable to hold Mr. Epstein responsible—never mind declare him in breach—with regard to Judge McSorley's nunc pro tune order. Exhibit 1, June 15, 2009 Letter at 3. Neither Mr. Epstein nor defense counsel had anything to do with and certainly no prior

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

ctim notifications (and, later, a Declaration in the Jane Doe litigation) based upon this understanding. When Epstein entered his guilty plea, Judge McSorley required him to file his federal Non-Prosecution Agreement with the Court since that formed part of the consideration for the state plea. I wanted