Epstein Secrets

the public at large, the civil remedy provisions in the NPA encouraged other plaintiffs' attorneys, such as First AUSA Sloman's former law partner, Jeffrey Herman (see below), and Ms. Villafana's confidential informant, Brad Edwards (see below), to obtain assistance from Ms. Villafana and the USAO in their ca

y as yet unnamed plaintiffs, and (3) the risk that the promise of uncontested damages may compromise so called "victim" testimony, all of which Mr. Whitley advised made it important that the NPA be reviewed at the highest levels of the Justice Department. See December 5, 2007 Memorandum of J. Whitley t

ings with the Florida Division of Corporations and/or the Florida Bar. On Friday, January 18, 2008, at approximately 1:15 pm, I received a call from Jeffrey Herman of Herman & Mermelstein. Herman said that he was planning to file a civil lawsuit the next week against Jeffrey Epstein. He said that his clients

suggests that this is politically motivated because Epstein is a prominent figure with "close ties to former President Clinton." Messrs. Starr and Whitley go on to claim that 1/FAUSA Sloman unilaterally, arbitrarily and unnecessarily imposed a June 2, 2008 deadline in order to prevent Epstein from see

ings with the Florida Division of Corporations and/or the Florida Bar. On Friday, January 18, 2008, at approximately 1:15 pm, I received a call from Jeffrey Herman of Herman & Mermelstein. Herman said that he was planning to file a civil lawsuit the next week against Jeffrey Epstein. He said that his clients

suggests that this is politically motivated because Epstein is a prominent figure with "close ties to former President Clinton." Messrs. Starr and Whitley go on to claim that 1/FAUSA Sloman unilaterally, arbitrarily and unnecessarily imposed a June 2, 2008 deadline in order to prevent Epstein from see

ngs with the Florida Division of Corporations and/or the Florida Bar. On Friday, January 18, 2008, at approximately 1:15 pm, I received a call from Jeffrey Herman of Herman & Mermelstein. Herman said that he was planning to file a civil lawsuit the next week against Jeffrey Epstein. He said that his clients

Agreement, the SDFL unilaterally proposed to divest its right to select the attorney representative for the victims. Contrary to Messrs. Starr and Whitley's recent assertion that this was "engineered in a way that appears intended to profit particular lawyers in private practice in South Florida with p

8-80069 (signed 2/28/201. 180. 3/5/2008, 9:09 am Emails between and Lefkowitz re: denial of request for information 181. 3/5/2008 Proof that Jeffrey Marc Herman is a member in good standing with the Florida bar 182. 3/6/2008, 9:47 am Email from Epstein to Indyke re: ethics violation list 183. 3/6/2008

rom to Lefkowitz re: deadline to comply with the agreement resolving Epstein's federal and state liabilities 193. 5/19/2008 Letter from Starr and Whitley to Filip43 re: asking him to review the federal involvement in Epstein's matter S Chief, Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Department of J

ings with the Florida Division of Corporations and/or the Florida Bar. On Friday, January 18, 2008, at approximately 1:15 pm, I received a call from Jeffrey Herman of Herman & Mermelsteln. Herman said that he was planning to file a civil lawsuit the next week against Jeffrey Epstein. He said that his clients

suggests that this is politically motivated because Epstein is a prominent figure with "close ties to former President Clinton." Messrs. Starr and Whitley go on to claim that 1/FAUSA Sloman unilaterally, arbitrarily and unnecessarily imposed a June 2, 2008 deadline in order to prevent Epstein from see

ngs with the Florida Division of Corporations and/or the Florida Bar. On Friday, January 18, 2008, at approximately 1:15 pm, I received a call from Jeffrey Herman of Herman & Mermelstein. Herman said that he was planning to file a civil lawsuit the next week against Jeffrey Epstein. He said that his clients

Agreement, the SDFL unilaterally proposed to divest its right to select the attorney representative for the victims. Contrary to Messrs. Starr and Whitley's recent assertion that this was "engineered in a way that appears intended to profit particular lawyers in private practice in South Florida with p