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

out of the auditorium to I more private area because I did not think it was I conversation meant for public consumption but they would not move. As the PSC Coordinator, I had overseen the invitations 13 For example, Epstein claimed that the massages were legitimate "medical" massages, so I wanted to see if he was

ntation of Epstein 12 8/4/2006 Victim Notification Letters 13 WI1/2006 Victim Notification Letters 14 1/17/07- 2/1/07 Correspondence between Lilly Ann Sanchez, Gerald Lelcourt, Andrew Laurie, A. Marie Villafrina, and John McMillan regarding 2/1/2007 Meeting 15 11/13/06- 1/22/07 Subpoenas to

25498 the auditorium to a more private area because I did not think it was a conversation meant for public consumption but they would not move. As the PSC Coordinator, I had overseen the invitations for the law enforcement representatives from the S.D. Fla., and Mr. Krischer had not been on the list. So I now won

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

uding in the non-prosecution agreement a provision incorporating 18 U.S.C. § 2255. As noted above, I became familiar with § 2255 through my work as the PSC Coordinator. I also was aware, as set forth in the victim notification letters that I prepared, that, under the CVRA, I was obligated to use my "best efforts"