Epstein Secrets

the crimes against the victims; (3) discovery of records explicating why the U.S. Attorney's Office decided to grant Epstein federal immunity; (4) the Department of Justice's designation of a representative to explain the Office's decision to resolve the Epstein case without any federal prosecution; (5) mandatory CVRA t

ice Department's Office of Legal Counsel ("OLCi. Maj. Op. at 1213-14 n.20. The Justice Department's 2010 OLC opinion, like the change of position by the Justice Department's local U.S. Attorney's Office, came only after Epstein's victims filed this lawsuit. See Mohasco Corp. v. Silver, 447 U.S. 807, 825, 100 S. Ct. 2486,

Acosta explained, "[a]fter considering the arguments raised at the September 7th meeting, and after conferring with the FBI and with [the Chief of the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section], our Office decided to proceed with the indictment." At that time, the State of Florida had already charged Epstein with on

hat you now object to the Agreement that you negotiated, this is akin to "buyer's remorse." However, you and Mr. Starr have, instead, made claims to the Justice Department that these thoroughly negotiated terms "leave[) wide open the opportunity for misconduct by federal investigators." You then misinterpret several st

Lot 6410 Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-013333 EFTA00230238 " /13/0 I S(60--)-104; Le:4w 1.3 Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-013334 EFTA00230239 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE Jay P. Lefkowitz, Esq. Kirkland & Ellis LLP Citigroup Center 153 Eas

atthew MencheP, First Assistant United States Attorney Jeffrey H. Sloman', United States Attorney R. Alexander Acosta as well as various members of the Child Exploitation and Eenity Section (CEOS) at the Department of Justice including, but not limited to its Chief, a. Oosterbahn. Many of these legal and factual iss

at procedural steps you think we need to bring this matter to a conclusion? That way we can work with you to avoid unnecessary procedural wrangling. The Justice Department is, of course, statutorily obligated to use its "best efforts" to "see that crime victims are ... accorded the rights described in [the CVRA]." 18 U

a motion before it is filed with: (1) The First Assistant U.S. Attorney in your Office; (2) if necessary, the U.S. Attorney; and (3) if necessary, the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section of the Criminal Division of the Justice Department (CEOS). As we have now learned from reading the e-mails, your Office decid

d period, in and around January 2008, there can be no dispute that Epstein's attorneys aggressively sought review of the NPA at higher levels within the Department of Justice, seeking relief from the obligations Epstein had undertaken in that agreement. First, he raised challenges to the United States Attorney's exercise

t. First, he raised challenges to the United States Attorney's exercise of his prosecutorial discretion with the Assistant Attorney General and with the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), within the Criminal Division of the DOJ in Washington, D.C. See Exs. G, K, L. Indeed, from late 2007 to May 2008, Eps

d period, in and around January 2008, there can be no dispute that Epstein's attorneys aggressively sought review of the NPA at higher levels within the Department of Justice, seeking relief from the obligations Epstein had undertaken in that agreement. First, he raised challenges to the United States Attorney's exercise

t. First, he raised challenges to the United States Attorney's exercise of his prosecutorial discretion with the Assistant Attorney General and with the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), within the Criminal Division of the DOJ in Washington, D.C. See Exs. G, K, L. Indeed, from late 2007 to May 2008, Eps

at procedural steps you think we need to bring this matter to a conclusion? That way we can work with you to avoid unnecessary procedural wrangling. The Justice Department is, of course, statutorily obligated to use its "best efforts" to "see that crime victims are ... accorded the rights described in [the CVRA]." 18 U

a motion before it is filed with: (1) The First Assistant U.S. Attorney in your Office; (2) if necessary, the U.S. Attorney; and (3) if necessary, the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section of the Criminal Division of the Justice Department (CEOS). As we have now learned from reading the e-mails, your Office decid

U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida 500 S. Australian Ave, Ste 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 Facsimile: (561) 82

ance, you neglect to mention that all of your objections were soundly rejected at each and every level of review, from West Palm Beach, to Miami, to the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, and, finally, to the highe review at the Department of Justice. As Senior Associate Deputy Attorney Genera stated: Even i

d period, in and around January 2008, there can be no dispute that Epstein's attorneys aggressively sought review of the NPA at higher levels within the Department of Justice, seeking relief from the obligations Epstein had undertaken in that agreement. First, he raised challenges to the United States Attorney's exercise

t. First, he raised challenges to the United States Attorney's exercise of his prosecutorial discretion with the Assistant Attorney General and with the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), within the Criminal Division of the DOJ in Washington, D.C. See Exs. G, K, L. Indeed, from late 2007 to May 2008, Eps

MJSSION Off'ICEOf VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN -- CIVIL DIVISION EHVIRONMEHT -- AND NATlJRAL RfSOURCfi DIVISION COMMUNITY -- RELATIONS SERVICE U.S. Department of Justice 2006- 2008 Attorney General Deputy Attorney General OFFICE OF OFFICE OF LEGAL POLICY ..... PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICE OF OFFICE OF LEGISLATIV

Report are the Appellate Section, the Office of Enforcement Operations, the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, and, most prominently, the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS). CEOS, based in Washington, D.C., comprises attorneys and investigators who specialize in investigating and prosecuti