Epstein Secrets

o make a statement under oath at the state sentencing."' 81. On November 28, 2007, Lefkowitz sent an email to U.S. Attorney Acosta (with a copy to AUSA Sloman) objecting to victim notifications: We do, however, strongly and emphatically object to your sending a letter to the alleged victims. Finally, we d

57 than confer with the victims about the fact that resolution by NPA was ever being considered— or even tell them that it was already a signed deal—the Office and Epstein inserted a "confidentiality" provision into the agreement barring its disclosure to anyone, including the victims. There is no dispute that the Gov

o make a statement under oath at the state sentencing."' 81. On November 28, 2007, Lefkowitz sent an email to U.S. Attorney Acosta (with a copy to AUSA Sloman) objecting to victim notifications: We do, however, strongly and emphatically object to your sending a letter to the alleged victims. Finally, we d

57 than confer with the victims about the fact that resolution by NPA was ever being considered— or even tell them that it was already a signed deal—the Office and Epstein inserted a "confidentiality" provision into the agreement barring its disclosure to anyone, including the victims. There is no dispute that the Gov

o make a statement under oath at the state sentencing.s44 81. On November 28, 2007, Lefkowitz sent an email to U.S. Attorney Acosta (with a copy to AUSA Sloman) objecting to victim notifications: We do, however, strongly and emphatically object to your sending a letter to the alleged victims. Finally, we d

57 than confer with the victims about the fact that resolution by NPA was ever being considered— or even tell them that it was already a signed deal—the Office and Epstein inserted a "confidentiality" provision into the agreement barring its disclosure to anyone, including the victims. There is no dispute that the Gov