Epstein Secrets

pstein's house. Sec In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum OLY-63 and OLY.64,Nu. F(31 07-103(WPB) (S.D. Fla. July 31, 2007). At the time she tiled Detective Recarey's affidavit, she knew it contained numerous material misrepresentations, including gross misstatements of witness statements and other evidence. Secon

Jury's indictment, the Chief took the unprecedented step of releasing his Department's raw police reports of the investigation (including Detective Recarey's unedited written reports of witness statements and witness identification information), that were later proven to be highly inaccurate transcript

d serious misrepresentations before a court. On July 31, 2007, in the grand-jury litigation arising out of this case, she filed the "Declaration of Joseph Recarey," attaching the state detective's affidavit in support of a search warrant for Epstein's house. Sec In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum OLY-63 an

aw police reports of the investigation (including Detective Recarey's unedited written reports of witness statements

re. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States I Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base to minors, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and 859(a)

ral prosecutors have pursued under the federal sta tes at issue here. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States I Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base

I do not recall whether S/A Malone was present. Detective Recarey summarized the investigation into state criminal

properly charge the case before presenting it for federal investigation and prosecution. In May 2006, I met with S/A Kuyrkendall and PBPD Detective Joe Recarey in the 4th Floor Conference Room at the U.S. Attorney's Office in West Palm Beach. I do not recall whether S/A Malone was present. Detective Recare

ecarey in the 4th Floor Conference Room at the U.S. Attorney's Office in West Palm Beach. I do not recall whether S/A Malone was present. Detective Recarey summarized the investigation into state criminal sexual conduct involving Epstein and his personal assistants. Briefly, Epstein, through his persona

e are several emails between myself and Jay Lefkowitz about the appointment of a GAL and the possibility of a restitution trust fund similar to the Boehm case out of Alaska. I obtained the trust fund agreement and spoke with the AUSA in 21 Mandatory restitution under § 3663A requires a conviction for

itation cases was a hot-button issue at the time. The District of Alaska USAO had a multi-victim child exploitation case with a wealthy defendant (Boehm) where they had set up a trust fund with a bank and a trustee. With Drew Oosterbaan's help, I explored setting up a similar situation in the Epstein

same things that you had asked me to do earlier is improper meddling in civil litigation. Much of your letter reiterates the challenges to Detective Recarey's investigation that have EFTA00207616 JAY P. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ. DECEMBER 13, 2007 PAGE 3 OF 5 already been submitted to the Office on several occ

each Police Department's probable cause affidavit has never been filed with the Court. If, in fact, you are referring to the Ex Parte Declaration of Joseph Recarey that was filed in response to the motion to quash the grand jury subpoena, it was filed both under seal and ex parte, so no one should have access

Much of your letter reiterates the challenges to Detective Recarey's investigation that have EFTA00207616 JAY P.

est in maintaining their privacy: (6) Experience litigating in federal court in the Southern District of Florida; ' Your letter refaitinces U.S. v Boehm, No. 3:04CR00003 (D. Ala 2004) as a model for a restitution fund sealement I asked ow prosecutor to contact the AOSA in that ease. In that matter, t

same things that you had asked me to do earlier is improper meddling in civil litigation. Much of your letter reiterates the challenges to Detective Recarey's investigation that have EFTA00213823 JAY P. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ. DECEMBER 13, 2007 PAGE 3 OF 5 already been submitted to the Office on several occ

each Police Department's probable cause affidavit has never been filed with the Court. If, in fact, you are referring to the Ex Parte Declaration of Joseph Recarey that was filed in response to the motion to quash the grand jury subpoena, it was filed both under seal and ex parte, so no one should have access

Much of your letter reiterates the challenges to Detective Recarey's investigation that have EFTA00213823 JAY P.

est in maintaining their privacy: (6) Experience litigating in federal court in the Southern District of Florida; ' Your letter refaitinces U.S. v Boehm, No. 3:04CR00003 (D. Ala 2004) as a model for a restitution fund sealement I asked ow prosecutor to contact the AOSA in that ease. In that matter, t

same things that you had asked me to do earlier is improper meddling in civil litigation. Much of your letter reiterates the challenges to Detective Recarey's investigation that have EFTA00289827 JAY Pi LEFICOWITZ, ESQ. DECEMBER 13, 2007 PAGE 3 OF 5 already been submitted to the Office on several oc

Beach Police Department's probable cause affidavit has never been filed with the Conn. If, in fact, you are referring to the Ex Parte Declaration of Joseph Recarey that was filed in response to the motion to quash the grand jury subpoena, it was filed both under seal and expecte, so no one should have access t

Much of your letter reiterates the challenges to Detective Recarey's investigation that have EFTA00289827 JAY Pi

er handler! between It. apatdit and the victims' representatives, and that this Office should not act as intermediary. Finally, I would note that in Boehm is well, the victims' identities were net Initially disclosed. At the AUSA wrote In dint cam "This filing is made cx ante because Boehm in hit plea

R. Alexander Acosta December 17, 2007 Page 2 which includes but is not limited to Ms. testimony; the witness transcripts; the tainted Detective Recarey reports; and our prior su missions. In light of the concerns we raised and the evidence we discussed at the December 14 meeting, we are firmly persu

testimony; the witness transcripts; the tainted Detective Recarey reports; and our prior su missions. In light of t

thing. Therefore, we urge that you direct that a full and fair and complete examination of the most trustworthy evidence be ordered. 10 In U.S. v. Boehm, the defendant bought and distributed crack cocaine and cocaine to underage girls; admitted to knowing that the girls were underage; arranged for un

ral prosecutors have pursued under the federal statutes at issue here. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States v. Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein’s case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base t

d Jury’s indictment, the Chief took the unprecedented step of releasing his Department’s raw police reports of the investigation (including Detective Recarey’s unedited written reports of witness statements and witness identification information), that were later proven to be highly inaccurate transcriptio

aw police reports of the investigation (including Detective Recarey’s unedited written reports of witness statements

g out of this case, she filed the “Declaration of Joseph Recarey,” attaching the state detective’s affidavit in su