Epstein Secrets

directing their communications to MAUSA9 , Criminal Chief First Assistant Jeff and U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta. did participate in meetings with the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office about Epstein's work release and several conference calls with defendant attorney Roy Black and others about Epstein's breaches of the Non-Prosecut

email from Jeff that said, "Hold the letter" (Exhibit B-54). On December 10, 2007, I contacted Jim Eisenberg, counsel for Individual # 28, who is Jane Doe #2 in the Jane Doe'. United States suit. As noted on the attached chart, Mr. Eisenberg was paid for by Mr. Epstein. I told Mr. Eisenberg that I was

ad been identified in the state investigation), alleging violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. The suit, which is still pending, is captioned Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 21 United States, 08-80736-CV-KAM. Page 3 of 58 EFTA00225046 set aside the NPA and see Mr. Epstein federally charged due to violatio

bit 76 at 2). On November 16, 2007, the case agents met with ASA Belohlavek who said that Epstein would be housed at the Palm Beach County Jail, so the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office would be in charge of whether Epstein would be eligible for work release (id. at I). Special Agent Richards confirmed on November 16, 2007 that Eps

of a federal case, but I don't recall discussing that at the time. 35 I had never before used a non-prosecution 34 As I noted in my filings in the Jane Doe' United States litigation, I had concerns about informing the victims that part of the negotiations involved securing for them the right to obtain d

tion for the work release program demonstrated that Mr. Epstein made several false statements in his application and made threatening statements to the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office about legal repercussions if he was not admitted to the program. I also discovered—again, not from Mr. Epstein or his attorneys—that Judge McSorley

of any breaches that we discover will be provided as required by the Non-Prosecution Agreement Our Office also will review the new pleading in the Jane Doe 101 matter that Mr. Lefkowitz mentioned, prior to deciding what, if any, remedies we will pursue for Mr. Epstein's breach. However, I note that, wh

tjegel aelfc1/7 27 Upon information and belief, one or more nude photographs of Plaintiff that were taken when she was a minor were confiscated by the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office during its execution of a search warrant of Defendant's Palm Beach mansion on October 20, 2005. Upon information and belief, those photographs are

- 1 2009 STEVEN M. ‘AFeMORE CLERK U.S. OUST. CT COMPLAINT AND Defendant. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 102, brings this Complaint against Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and states as follows: PARTIES. JURISDICTION. AND VENUE 1. At all times materi

2009 Page 10 of 27 Upon information and belief, one or more nude photographs of Plaintiff that were taken when she was a minor were confiscated by the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office during its execution of a search warrant of Defendant's Palm Beach mansion on October 20, 2005. Upon information and belief, those photographs are

2009 STEVEN M. 6ARIMORE J. C A R. OF FLA. MIAMI COMPLAINT AND Defendant. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 102, brings this Complaint against Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and states as follows: PARTIES. JUFUSDICTION, AND VENUE 1. At all times materi

2009 Page 10 of 27 Upon information and belief, one or more nude photographs of Plaintiff that were taken when she was a minor were confiscated by the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office during its execution of a search warrant of Defendant's Palm Beach mansion on October 20, 2005. Upon information and belief, those photographs are

AY - 12009 STEVEN M oknimoRE CLERK U.S. 01ST. CT COMPLAINT AND Defendant. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 102, brings this Complaint against Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and states as follows: PARTIES. JUFtl$DICTION. AND VENUE 1. At all times mater

tion for the work release program demonstrated that Mr. Epstein made several false statements in his application and made threatening statements to the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office about legal repercussions if he was not admitted to the program. I also discovered—again, not from Mr. Epstein or his attorneys—that Judge McSorley

of any breaches that we discover will be provided as required by the Non-Prosecution Agreement. Our Office also will review the new pleading in the Jane Doe 101 matter that Mr. Lefkowitz mentioned, prior to deciding what, if any, remedies we will pursue for Mr. Epstein's breach. However, I note that, whi

rew Lourie, Criminal Chief Matt Menchel, First Assistant Jeff Sloman, and U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta. AUSA Atkinson did participate in meetings with the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office about Epstein's work release and several conference calls with defendant attorney Roy Black and others about Epstein's breaches of the Non-Prosecut

Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) arising out of a decision by United States District Judge Kenneth A. Marra in the matter of Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2I United States, S.D. Fla. Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra; (3) the materials are needed to avoid an injustice in another proceeding, th

tion for the work release program demonstrated that Mr. Epstein made several false statements in his application and made threatening statements to the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office about legal repercussions if he was not admitted to the program. I also discovered—again, not from Mr. Epstein or his attorneys—that Judge McSorley

ttorney Edwards who was informed of these developments and who received both the initial and corrected victim notification letters that were sent to Jane Doe #1. 12. In accordance with the Court's instructions at the status conference of August 14, 2008 and the terms of the Protective Order entered by t

tion for the work release program demonstrated that Mr. Epstein made several false statements in his application and made threatening statements to the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office about legal repercussions if he was not admitted to the program. I also discovered—again, not from Mr. Epstein or his attorneys—that Judge McSorley

ttorney Edwards who was informed of these developments and who received both the initial and corrected victim notification letters that were sent to Jane Doe #1. 12. In accordance with the Court's instructions at the status conference of August 14, 2008 and the terms of the Protective Order entered by t