Epstein Secrets

) & (8). It is now beyond dispute, for example, that in September 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office formally signed a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein that barred his The victims are contemporaneously filing a motion to have their facts accepted by the Court. EFTA00177009 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM

ein agreed to a "confidentiality" provision in the agreement barring its disclosure to anyone — including the victims. For the next nine months, as Epstein was well aware, the U.S. Attorney's Office assiduously concealed from the victims the existence of this signed non-prosecution agreement. Indeed, th

t's desire that federal charges be filed against defendant Epstein. In particular, he wrote on behalf of his clients

formally signed a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein that barred his The victims are contempo

criminal prosecution commensurate with the crimes Mr. Epstein has committed, and we further urge you to take t

the sentencing court are restricted by the CVRA from effecting reasonable settlement or restitution measures against nonconvicted defendants." hi re W.R. Huff Asset Mgt. Co., LLC, 409 F.3d 555, 564 (2d Cir. 2005) (emphasis added). In W.R. Huff petitioners filed two writs of mandamus seeking to vacate settlement agreemen

l relevant times, the Office had approximately 20 Assistant U.S. Attorneys assigned to the West Palm Beach location. The prosecutor assigned to the Epstein case, I I end I were assigned to different sections within the Office. We reported to different supervisors. 11. I did not participate in any way

ent 79 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/03/2011 Page 2 of 4 violated Florida Bar rules and Department of Justice regulations by representing employees of Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") in civil litigation after the undersigned retired from the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "Of

Justice regulations by representing employees of Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") in civil litigation after the

s retained to represent several other members of Mr. Epstein's staff in their civil depositions. I5.. After

the sentencing court are restricted by the CVRA from effecting reasonable settlement or restitution measures against nonconvicted defendants." In re W.R. Huff Asset Mgt. Co., LLC, 409 F.3d 555, 564 (2d Cir. 2005) (emphasis added). In WR. Huff petitioners filed two writs of mandamus seeking to vacate settlement agreement

l relevant times, the Office had approximately 20 Assistant U.S. Attorneys assigned to the West Palm Beach location. The prosecutor assigned to the Epstein case, Ann Marie Villafana, end I were assigned to different sections within the Office. We reported to different supervisors. 11. I did not partic

ent 79 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/03/2011 Page 2 of 4 violated Florida Bar rules and Department of Justice regulations by representing employees of Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") in civil litigation after the undersigned retired from the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "Of

Justice regulations by representing employees of Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") in civil litigation after the

s retained to represent several other members of Mr. Epstein's staff in their civil depositions. I5.. After

the sentencing court are restricted by the CVRA from effecting reasonable settlement or restitution measures against nonconvicted defendants." In re W.R. Huff Asset Mgt. Co., LLC, 409 F.3d 555, 564 (2d Cir. 2005) (emphasis added). In WR. Huff petitioners filed two writs of mandamus seeking to vacate settlement agreement

eference to the position taken by employees of the Department of Justice (DOJ) in letters to the petitioners, or the defense attorneys representing Jeffrey Epstein. Nor are the subjective beliefs of DOJ employees relevant to the issue of whether a duty existed under § 3771(a)(5) to consult with petitioners prio

later, on July 9, 2008, the Government filed its Response and an accompanying Declaration, establishing that (1) no federal criminal case charging Epstein had ever been filed and that a non- prosecution agreement ("NPA") had been signed and (2) despite this, the U.S. Attorney's Office had used its best

titioners, or the defense attorneys representing Jeffrey Epstein. Nor are the subjective beliefs of DOJ em

the sentencing court are restricted by the CVRA from effecting reasonable settlement or restitution measures against nonconvicted defendants." In re W.R. Huff Asset Mgt. Co., LLC, 409 F.3d 555, 564 (2d Cir. 2005) (emphasis added). In W.R. me, petitioners filed two writs of mandamus seeking to vacate settlement agreemen

nt argues that its internal deliberations led to a decision not to notify victims because the line prosecutor wanted to avoid the possibility that "Epstein's counsel would impeach the victims and my credibility by asserting that I told victims they could receive money for implicating Epstein." DE 403-10

ick Komspan & Stumpf 201 S Biscayne Boulevard Suite 1300 Miami, FL 33131 305-371-6421 Fax: 358-2006 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Is/ &ale. p. 5cloanda 1 I EFTA00600127

2006 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Jeffrey Epstein Is/ &ale. p. 5cloanda 1 I EFTA00600127

"the right to dictate government strategy or demand who to prosecute." United States v. Thetford, 935 F.Supp.2d 1289 (N.D. Ala. 2013) (citing In re W.R. Huff Asset Mgt. Co., 409 F.3d 555, 564 (2d Cir. 2005)). But as the Court knows, from the very outset of this case, the victims have disclaimed any intention of command