Epstein Secrets

were over 18, some were under, and the identity of a given masseuse on a given day depended entirely on who was available or who was brought to Mr. Epstein home, unsolicited, by a friend. There was, in short, no deliberate effort to target underage girls; to the extent any underage girls visited Mr. Ep

tirely on who was available or who was brought to Mr. Epstein home, unsolicited, by a friend. There was, in sh

hat each has brought a civil lawsuit against Mr. Epstein, with Ms. and her family seeking $50 million from Mr. Epstein, their testimony against Mr. Epstem is per se suspect. The lawyer representing the "victims" made a public statement conceding that they had lied about their ages and then dismissed t

ED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN This submission addresses (i) whether e

mes such that Federal jurisdiction is necessary."). EFTA00225908 • • • SUBMISSION TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN This submission addresses (i) whether existing federal statutes, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422(b), 1591 and 2423, apply to the conduct at issue; and (ii) wheth

ED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN THE MATTER OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN This submission addresses (i) whether ex

ment. Rather, inducement refers to government c duct that persuades a person to turn "from a righteous path to an iniquitous one." United States I Gifford, 17 F.3d 462, 468 (15` Cir. 1994) (citations omitted). Inducement entails some semblar of "arm-twisting," pleading, or coercive tactics. See id. Flo

S • TELEFAX 340.776.7720 MEMORANDUM Darren K. Indyke MARK HODGE GATLIN VOGEL Request for information with respect to all Civil Lawsuits of which JE, FTC or LSJ or Lafayette were named as defendants in the past 10 years: date lawsuit filed, name and address of the court, docket/case number, name

V-91 Nature of suit: Breach of contract Disposition: Dismissed by order of the court Date of disposition: September 20, 2010 EFTA00307081 2. Jeffrey E. Epstein v. D. Eric Williams a/k/a Eric Williams, Hairoun Aviation Services, Inc., R Pearlitha Williams and Josephine Simmons Plaintiff: Jeffrey E. Epstein

September 20, 2010 EFTA00307081 2. Jeffrey E. Epstein v. D. Eric Williams a/k/a Eric Williams, Hairoun

sposition: September 20, 2010 EFTA00307081 2. Jeffrey E. Epstein v. D. Eric Williams a/k/a Eric Williams,

sposition: September 20, 2010 EFTA00307081 2. Jeffrey E. Epstein v. D. Eric Williams a/k/a Eric Williams,

nancial Trust Company, Inc. was to enforce two notes and hypothecation agreement Disposition: Settled and stipulation for dismissal filed 2. Main Gifford d/b/a Blessed Trucking vs. LSJ, LLC, Lafayette Contractors, LLC, William Rowles and Lance Galloway Plaintiff: Alain Gifford d/b/a Blessed Trucking

sification: UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Transitory Morning, I was reviewing the HT Tips this morning and we received one with a possible connection to the Epstein case. It looks like the CT State Attorney is looking into it but I wanted to make sure you were aware. From: Walcott, Sharmese Sent: Monday, June

how to remove her clothing in a seductive manner ■ Eric forced to kiss him and sleep in the same bed as him o Eric attempted to get to model for Geoffrey Epstein ■ Natash states she was denied due to her age o Unknown Potential Buyer paid Frey $55,000 for sexual encounter with ■ was also sold to Unknown Po

ar, Tanya (USANYE) < >; Kelly, Jacqueline (USANYS) 2 ; Bagliebter, Jamie (USANYS) a; Patel, Neeraj (USACT) a; Simms, Odessa Ann (NY) (FBI) < >; Gifford, Nancy (USACT) Chan, Grace (NY) (FBI) < > Cc: ; NH_HT < >; Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] - Re: National Hotline TIP [01333968] Supplemental report fo

From: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 8:34 PM To: Andrew McCormack Subject: Re: Opportunity to purchase Transferwise shares

sh=re). The Company most recently raised money at a pre-money valuation=of $1.1B (-$29.8 per share) in their Series D round which was led by Baill=e Gifford at the beginning of this year. Transfer=ise has been on a very impressive run this year and should end 2016 at a r=n rate of approximately $100M i

ry to prove the certainty of their innocence. The Jeffrey MacDonald case discussed previously, is a prime e

ather as another prosecutor, with a stake in the outcome. She wanted to see the most famous “rapist” in Indiana history convicted and put away. Judge Gifford made virtually every important ruling in the prosecutor’s favor, including the exclusion of those three “pivotal” witnesses who would have won the ca