Epstein Secrets

I wanted to thank you for making the time for breakfast Friday. It was great to catch up. Following up on our conversation about the date for Mr. Epstein's plea, where you said that you didn't want to dictate a schedule to the state, as we discussed I have a case where I represent an individual who i

hout success, including allowing the Petitioners, that is Jane Does #1 and #2, and their counsel, the opportunity to meet with the U.S. Attorney, as Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys did.' Despite the Petitioners' earlier statement to the Court that no additional facts were needed, many hours were spent trying to revi

r information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you again for your assistance with this matter. Sincerely, United States Attorney By: Jeffrey First Assistant United States Attorney cc: AUSA US_Atty_Cor_00226 EFTA00184837 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 362-9 Entered on FLSD Docket 02

nt set by Congress as of the date of the occurrences) or $150.000 (the amount currently set by statute) or some other agreed upon damage amount. Mr. P.pstein must pay for the services of the selected attorney representative as long as they are limited to settling the claims of the identified individuals.

OFFICE Finally, I would like to address a more general point Our Agreement was first signed on September 24th, 2007. Pursuant to paragraph II, Mr. Epsteinwas to use his best efforts to enter his guilty pies raid be sentenced no later than October 26,2007. As outlined in correspondence between our prosecu

ext week. Accordingly, I have now confirmed with Mr. Epstein's Florida counsel that the state's attorney's of

b;e ct Dear Jay: Jeff asked that I forward the victim notification letter to you. It is attached. Thank you. «Victim NotlfloatIon Ltr.pdf» A. Villafaila Assistant U.S. Attorney 08-80736-CV-MARRA RFP WPB 01)0429 EFTA00184871 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 362-14 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016

For A Millionaire Sex Abuser,” Huffington Post, Nov. 29, 2018; Julie K. Brown, et al., “Lawmakers issue call for investigation of serial sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein’s plea deal,” Miami Herald, Dec. 6, 2018. 5 Doe v. United States, 359 F. Supp. 3d 1201 (S.D. Fla., Feb. 21, 2019) (Opinion and Order, 9:08-80736-CIV

n by negotiating and executing a federal non-prosecution agreement (NPA). The NPA was intended to end a federal investigation into allegations that Epstein engaged in illegal sexual activity with girls.1 OPR also investigated whether USAO prosecutors committed professional misconduct by failing to con

e Parties Continue to Negotiate Issues concerning the Attorney Representative and Finally Reach Agreement on the NPA Addendum ................91 D. Epstein Further Delays His Guilty Plea .................................................................94 E. Epstein Seeks Departmental Review of the NP

Its 2006–2008 Federal Criminal Investigation of Jeffrey Epstein and Its Interactions with Victims during

me when you were first authorized to investigate Mr. Epstein that the office had concerns about taking this c

t ~ - Sloman becomes First Assistant L:mted States Attorney: Menchcl becomes Crunmal Chief - ~ - ~ -. ~ - ~ - June 26 - Sloman, Mencbel, Lourie, Villafaila, and FBI meet with Epstein's counsel July 26 - V11lafat1a learns from Menchel that Acosta decided to offer Epstein a two-year state-based resolut

It has utterly failed to even offer any such cause — much less show that it is good cause. Second, the Government — with the apparent contrivance of Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys — has made inaccurate representations about the nature of the non-prosecution agreement in its notices to the victims and in its filing b

well as to the Court — lies with Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys'. See Gov't Response at 5 ("the [inaccurate] victim notification letter was provided to Epstein's attorneys prior to being sent, who approved the language of which the petitioners now complain."). The apparent approval by Jeffrey Epstein's at

-2006 Amendments version of the law applies. See Defendant Epstein's Motion to Dismiss, for More Definite Statement

he terms of the non-prosecution agreement between Jeffrey Epstein and the United States Government. Jeffre

made a part of the record and the extent to which Mr. Epstein, through his attorneys, was culpable. Sincerely

t position in this case, it is that this provision is not in fact part of the plea agreement in this case. If our understanding is correct, then Ms. Villafaila has filed a false affidavit with the court, albeit inadvertently. We respectfully request that she file a new affidavit that corrects this false in

provide notice to the victims. It is also needed to demonstrate why the victims at first received inaccurate information about the NPA, as well as Jeffrey Epstein's involvement in that inaccurate notice. See, e.g., DE 48 at 15-16. 43. RFP No. 16 requests documents regarding Bruce Reinhart, a senior prosecutor w

ch re Travel for Prostitution" containing attorney (Villafafta) handwritten notes regarding grand jury presentation, chart entitled "Brought to Epstein's House" with handwritten notes, Message Pad meta- analysis chart, summary of evidence related to one victim/witness, and relevant grand jury inf

serted Victims' Objections Box #3 Folder entitled "Responses to Arguments Work product No Factual Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; P-011923 from JE Counsel" containing: Deliberative process Crime-Fraud-Misconduct; Crime-Fraud- Thru ■ 7/13/2007 letter from Lilly Ann 6(e) Misconduct; Not in A

of course, is a defense attorney who represented defendant Epstein. Recording information provided by a defense att

net (617) 338-9538 Criminal Defense Counsel for Jeffrey Epstein /s/ Bradley J. Edwards 3 EFTA00179621

Objections Box #1 P-000983 thru P-001007 File folder entitled "Attorney Notes from Document Review" containing typed and handwritten attorney (Villafaila) notes, target letters, correspondence re grand jury subpoena Work product 6(e) Contains information subject to investigative privilege. Also

RENATO C. STABILE ada•Okoltostaa. corn FAITH A. FRIEDMAN Mearnageskeurstet teen BY FEDERAL EXPRESS ear T essrs. oman, T enc e an July 6, 2007 rey Epstein uric and Ms. Villafaila: HONE I/ zJ 7370400 FAcSIMILE 421211388.6102 We %Tice as counsel to Jeffrey Epstein to follow-up on our meeting on Ju

w best to use the broad discretion you enjoy in choosing whether to prosecute. In this regard, we suggest that having a greater understanding of who Jeffrey Epstein is as a person may help inform how best to proceed. Jeffrey Epstein was raised in a middle class neighborhood in Brooklyn, New York, by hardworking

hen it enacted this law.5 Though §2422(b) is susceptible to multiple interpretations, it was designed to address a specific a problem with which Mr. Epstein's case has nothing in common. I stretched to reach beyond the core concern of the statute, a host of problems immediately arise. A simple reading o

igned to address a specific a problem with which Mr. Epstein's case has nothing in common. I stretched to rea

FAcSIMILE 421211388.6102 We %Tice as counsel to Jeffrey Epstein to follow-up on our meeting on June 26,

ltostaa. corn FAITH A. FRIEDMAN Mearnageskeurstet teen BY FEDERAL EXPRESS ear T essrs. oman, T enc e an July 6, 2007 rey Epstein uric and Ms. Villafaila: HONE I/ zJ 7370400 FAcSIMILE 421211388.6102 We %Tice as counsel to Jeffrey Epstein to follow-up on our meeting on June 26, 2007. We thought

osecution Agreement, an October 2007 Addendum and a letter dated December 19, 2007 from the U.S. Attorney to Attorney Lilly Ann Sanchez , Counsel to Jeffrey Epstein (DE 35 at ¶3).' I I assume those involved in the above-referenced litigation, have copies of the relevant court filings, but if you desire any of t

he Victim's Petition further alleges that in violation of the CVRA, Jane Doe #1 was not consulted with respect to the USAO-SDFLA's negotiations with Epstein (DE 1 at ¶¶3-6). The "Jane Doe NI and Jane Doe # 2 Status Report and Response to Court's Order to Show Lack of Prosecution" (DE 41) argues that "th

States, Case No.: 08-80736-C1V- MARRA/Johnson AND Jeffrey Epstein As a follow-up to your recent meeting co

Villafafia indicates that "in the summer of 2007, Mr. Epstein and the [USAO-SDFLA] entered into negotiations t

.M.", and "S.R." by AUSA Villafatia and the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist Twiller Smith. DE 14. In addition, appended to the Declaration are AUSA Villafaila's letters to the victim's counsel, Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. DE 14. Special Agent Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, F.B.I. is copied on AUSA Villafafia's letters

e accompanying Orders. BACKGROUND 1. From 2006 to 2008, the undersigned (hereinafter Villafaila) was the lead prosecutor on the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, known as Operation Leap Year. 2. That matter involved the issuance of subpoenas on behalf of and the presentation of testimony to Federal Grand J

ing the federal investigation. The USAO also decided to enter into this NPA without first conferring with those victims. 4. After signing the NPA, Epstein delayed performing its terms, and began raising arguments to various officials within the Justice Department challenging both the legality of the N

was the lead prosecutor on the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, known as Operation Leap Year. 2. That

s matter because his former law firm represented Mr. Epstein during the course of the investigation and negoti

tive Order; and (3) the sealing of this Application, and the accompanying Orders. BACKGROUND 1. From 2006 to 2008, the undersigned (hereinafter Villafaila) was the lead prosecutor on the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, known as Operation Leap Year. 2. That matter involved the issuance of subpoenas

me, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2423 and 2. Counts Five and Six charge the defendant with perjury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1623.1 ARGUMENT I. Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement Is Irrelevant to This Case The defendant seeks to dismiss the Indictment based on a 2007 non-prosecution agreement ("NPA"

illegal sex acts, and aiding and abetting the same, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422 and 2. Count Three charges the defendant with conspiring with Epstein and others to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. Count Four charges the defendant with transporti

NARY STATEMENT 1 BACKGROUND 2 ARGUMENT 3 I. Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement Is Irrelevant

f America Assistant United States Attorneys - Of Counsel - EFTA00095067 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1 BACKGROUND 2 ARGUMENT 3 I. Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement Is Irrelevant to This Case 3 A. The NPA Does Not Bind the Southern District of New York 4 1. The Text of the Agreement

ale friend who was a well- known socialite, but, according to Villafaha, in 2007, they "didn't have any specific evidence against her." Accordingly, Villafaila believed that the only "co-conspirators" of Epstein who would benefit from the provision were the four female assistants identified by name. 20

5. Since this involves a statutory interpretation issue, I am reluctant to start offering opinions on whether a breach of the Agreement occurs when Epstein argues that the current version of section 2255, with its floor of $150,000 in damages, does not apply to him. He may have agreed in negotiations t

nd contained the "incorrect" info (i.e., the December 2007 info). The second notification was sent on September 3rd, with the correct info. A. Made Villafaila Assistant U.S. Attorney 500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL. 33401 Phone 561 209-1047 Fax 561 820-8777 From: Lee, Dexter (USAF