Epstein Secrets

mputer and cited by Edwards inn 16-18; correspondence between the U.S. Attorney and Jay Leflcowitz, Esq. (Exs. C and D and 9fq 6, 20, 25) and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq. (Ex. L andl 28); a book receipt (Ex. I and 1 22), message pads (Ex. A. 1 24) and a property receipt (Ex. O and 1 34) ; correspondence between

resently works, and to prepare a privilege log. The Plaintiff, without objection, agreed and was ordered to pay the legal fees and costs incurred by the Special Master in the preparation of this log (A :5). Prior to the hearing, two motions in opposition were filed by Farmer Jaffee (A: 3 and 4). Subsequently, on

: Es►wmo Sumo PLAZA ITCAMISDON float 1395 °Ram AWN.* MOM. 110MCA 331 31 IttomoNt 13O5/78992OO racseaL21305) 789-9201 www.rostER-rmac-cow Lure ANN SANCHEZ OwtocT Piec No.; 130517890279 Dna ►acs.at No : 13O5/ 728-7570 • •s•s-••••Te/rowteftwHrTc.coN I LVIA FEDERAL EXPRESS II I write to follow up on th

tified individual and Epstein." (Paragraph 8, Agreement) This interpretation is supported by your own language in the draft proposed joint letter to the Special Master ("Mr. Epstein...agreed to waive any challenge to liability under that section up to an amount agreed to by the parties."). Consequently, those iden

ld 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 believed the p

rida Bar rules against solicitation. He had filed complaints against myself and against Robert Josefsberg — the attorney-representative selected by the Special Master. On September 18, 2008, I wrote to the Florida Bar asking for an Ethics opinion (Exhibit B-93). I did not feel that I could send out any additional