Epstein Secrets

those changes. Criminal Chief participated in numerous meetings on the case, and had private conversations regarding resolution of the matter with Lilly counsel to Mr. Epstein. Ms. had formerly served as Deputy Chief in the Major Crimes Section at the USAO while Mr. was Chief of Major Crimes. As

o let us know if Epstein did, in fact, apply for work release. We never received any notice ofas application. Instead, on November 20, 2008, when Gauger stopped by to see on another matter he told her that Epstein had been on work release for the past few weeks (Exhibit 82). Sil spoke with the work

between his attorneys and your office, Epstein secretly withheld correspondence by several of his mostii ral owered attorneys — namely Ken Starr and Lilly. Sanchez. Epstein settled the case wit within days after this limited production, and we did not realize the absence of what must have been critic

er restrain them from notifying the Sheriff's Office if Mr. Epstein was not abiding by the work release rules. As I previously mentioned to Colonel Gauger, the decision regarding work release is completely within the discretion of the Sheriff's Office. The purpose of this letter is simply to provide y

in child exploitation cases was an issue of growing concern, so I was mindful that this plea mechanism that Criminal Chief Menchel had devised with Lilly Ann Sanchez would extinguish, the victims' right to restitution. That was one of the reasons why, on July 4, 2007, I wrote to Mr. Menchel that I be

s know if Epstein did, in fact, apply for work release. We never received any notice of Epstein's application. Instead, on November 20, 2008, when Gauger stopped by to see Karen Atkinson on another matter, he told her that Epstein had been on work release for the past few weeks (Exhibit 82). S/A Kuyrk