Epstein Secrets

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

the a plication of the law to different defendants and defense attorneys has resulted in I call for the resignation of the who dared to challenge the Executive Office's conclusions. I find that very disheartening. However, my first and only concern in this case (and my other child exploitation cases) is the victims

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

application of the law to different defendants and defense attorneys has resulted in a call for the resignation of the AUSA who dared to challenge the Executive Office's conclusions. I find that very disheartening. However, my first and only concern in this case (and my other child exploitation cases) is the victims

M Document 330 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2015 Page 1 of 51 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.:08-CV-80736-ICAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the Court on various discovery re

for the Southern District of Florida and the Executive Office of United States Attorneys. (DE M-1 at 22-23); (see Table at P-013248-13278). One of the Executive Office's functions is to "[p]rovide general legal interpretations, opinions, and advice to United States Attorneys in areas of recusals." Offices of the Uni

00059568 CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R.WANI(E IDENTIAL DB-SDNY-0022392 EFTA_00I7Ol 18 EFTA01296786 Page 62 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87203, * JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. CASE NO.:08-CV-80736-KAM UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DIS

or the Southern District of Florida and the Executive Office of United States Attorneys. (DE 212-1 at 22-23); (see Table at P-013248-13278). One of the Executive Office's functions is to "[p]rovide general legal interpretations, opinions, and advice to United States Attorneys in areas of recusals." Offices of the Uni

AM Document 330 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2015 Page 1 of 51 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.:08-CV-80736-KAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. I OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the Court on various discove

for the Southern District of Florida and the Executive Office of United States Attorneys. (DE 212-1 at 22-23); see Table at P-013248-13278). One of the Executive Office's functions is to "[p]rovide general legal interpretations, opinions, and advice to United States Attorneys in areas of recusals." Offices of the Uni

M Document 330 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/06/2015 Page 1 of 51 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.:08-CV-80736-ICAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the Court on various discovery re

or the Southern District of Florida and the Executive Office of United States Attorneys. (DE 212-1 at 22-23); (see Table at P-013248-13278). One of the Executive Office's functions is to "[p]rovide general legal interpretations, opinions, and advice to United States Attorneys in areas of recusals." Offices of the Uni