Epstein Secrets

nal Section. By that time, our Office had already received a proposed initial indictment package, which had been reviewed by the supervisors in our West Palm Beach Office and by attorneys with the Justice D artment's ChildStation and Obscenity Section, but which was awaiting review by Mr. d FAUSA The Office deferre

t Los Angeles, CA 90017 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Mr. Stan: I write in response to your letter ofNovember 28, 2007, to Assistant Attorney General Fisher. There are a number of issues that must be addressed, but I believe that a history of the negotiations with the various counsel for Mr. Epstein wou

nal Section. By that time, our Office had already received a proposed 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 Slo

Los Angeles, CA 90017 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Mr. Stan: I write in response to your letter of November 28, 2007, to Assistant Attorney General Fisher. There are a number of issues that must be addressed, but I believe that a history of the negotiations with the various counsel for Mr. Epstein wou

nal Section. By that time, our Office had already received a proposed 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 Slo

y representative, and not from the Government, to avoid any bias. As you know, Judge Starr has requested a meeting with Assistant Attorney General Fisher to address what we believe is the unprecedented nature of the section 2255 component of the Agreement. We are hopeful that this meeting will take pl