Epstein Secrets

est Palm Beach Office and by attorneys with the Justice Department's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, but which was awaiting review by Mr. Menchel and FAUSA Sloman. The Office deferred presenting the indictment to the grand jury to accommodate your client's request for a meeting. The Office als

uance of several subpoenas. At that time, Mr. Lefcourt began leveling accusations of improprieties with the investigation and sought a meeting with Matthew Menchel, who was then Chief of the Criminal Section. By that time, our Office had already received a proposed initial indictment package, which had been re

ed concerns regarding our prosecution. To ensure a full consideration of your arguments, I invited Drew Oosterbaan, Chief of the Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, to travel from Washington to attend our meeting. During the September 7h meeting, your co-counsel, Mr. Lefkowitz, offered a p

est Palm Beach Office and by attorneys with the Justice Department's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, but which was awaiting review by Mr. Menchel and FAUSA Sloman. The Office deferred presenting the indictment to the grand jury to accommodate your client's request for a meeting. The Office als

initial indictment package, which had been reviewed by the supervisors in our West Palm Beach Office and by attorneys with the Justice Department's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, but which was awaiting review by Mr. Menchel and FAUSA Sloman. The Office deferred presenting the indictment to the grand jur

n to use "a" versus "the" and other minutiae. When you and I could not reach agreement, you repeatedly went over my head, involving Messrs. Lourie, Menchel, Sloman, and Acosta in the negotiations at various times. In any and all plea negotiations the defendant understands that his options are to plead

ased concerto regarding our prosecution. To ensure a sill consideretioe of your arguments 1 invited btcw Ousualear, Chief of the Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, to travel from Washington to attend our meeting. During the September 7' meeting, your co-counsel, Mr. Lefkowitz. offered a

listen. Along those lines, given the fact that we have already met once, with schedules being what they are, it makes sense for our criminal chief, Matt Menchel, to be included when you make another presentation, rather than working up the chain Incrementally. I realize you were being respectful in not attem

t was the product of months of negotiations. Specifically, you requested and received numerous meetings, at the highest levels of the SDFL and DOD's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) concerning claims that (a) the investigation merely produced evidence of relatively innocuous sexual conduct with some

, 2007 (82 pages), Author: A. Marie Villafana. Addressees: R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney; Jeff Sloman, First Assistant U.S. Attorney; Matthew Menchel, Chief, Criminal Division; Andrew Lourie; Managing Assistant U.S. Attorney, Northern Region; and Karen Atkinson, Chief, Northern Region. (P). Draf

n (2 pages) Letter to Jay Lefkowitz, Esq., dated May 15, 2008, RE: Investigation of Jeffery Epstein (5 pages), Author: Andrew G. Oosterbaan, Chief, Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice E-mail, Jay Lefkowitz to Alex Acosta, dated May 19, 2008 10:54 a.m., RE: confi

n to use "a" versus "the" and other minutiae. When you and I could not reach agreement, you repeatedly went over my head, involving Messrs. Lourie, Menchel, Sloman, and Acosta in the negotiations at various times. In any and all plea negotiations the defendant understands that his options are to plead

o present Federalism-based con r • our prosecution. To ensure a full consideration of your arguments, l invited Chief of the Criminal Division's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, to travel from Washington to attend our meeting. During the September 7th meeting, your co-counsel, Mr. Lefirowitz, offend a