Epstein Secrets

See Tab 22, August 31, 2007 Letter from M. to A. Ross. FAUSA Forces Mr. Epstein's Lawyers to Convince

e unnamed women in claims against Epstein). (c) 26. The next day, AUSA advised the defense that she was removing one of the alternatives to Mr. Ocariz from our consideration, on the basis that "one of his partners is married to an AUSA here," and explained that, because of that personal relationshi

unlicensed money-transmitting business (18 U.S.C. § 1960), though Mr. Epstein never had such a business. See Tab 22, August 31, 2007 Letter from to Ross (reciting, in a target letter to one of Epstein's employees, that the investigation concerns "suspected violations of federal law, including but no

friend and law school classmate of ms. boyfriend, a fact she assiduously kept hidden from counsel. We also learned from Ms. that she shared with Ocariz the summary of charges the government was considering against Mr. Epstein. Even after your Office conceded that it was inappmpriate for its attorne

an unlicensed money-transmitting business (18 U.S.C. § 1960), though tin never had such a business. See Tab 22, August 31, 2007 Letter from M. to Ross (reciting, in a target letter to one of Epstein's employees, that the investigation concerns "suspected violations of federal law, including but no

nt the unnamed women in claims against Epstein). 26. The next day, AUSA advised the defense that she was removing one of the alternatives to Mr. Ocariz from our consideration, on the basis that "one of his partners is married to an AUSA here," and explained that, because of that personal relationshi

perating an unlicensed money-transmitting business (18 U.S.C. § 1960), thou never had such a business. See Tab 22, August 31, 2007 Letter from to Ross (reciting, in a target letter to one of Epstein's employees, that the investigation concerns "suspected violations of federal law, including but no

nt the unnamed women in claims against Epstein). 26. The next day, AUSA advised the defense that she was removing one of the alternatives to Mr. Ocariz from our consideration, on the basis that "one of his partners is married to an AUSA here," and explained that, because of that personal relationshi

ensed money-transmitting business (18 U.S.C. § 1960), though Mr. Epstein never had such a business. See August 31, 2007 Letter from M. Villafana to Ross (reciting, in a target letter to one of Mr. Epstein's employees, that the investigation concerns "suspected violations of federal law, including bu

osely and personally connected to Ms. Villafana's own live-in boyfriend. Upon learning of this fact, United States Attorney Alex Acosta removed Mr. Ocariz from consideration. Mr. Epstein's attorney, Joe Whitley, a former United States Assistant Attorney General, predicted that the unprecedented incorp

unlicensed money-transmitting business (18 U.S.C. § 1960), though Mr. Epstein never had such a business. See Tab 22, August 31, 2007 Letter from to Ross (reciting, in a target letter to one of Epstein's employees, that the investigation concerns "suspected violations of federal law, including but no

nt the unnamed women in claims against Epstein). 26. The next day, AUSA advised the defense that she was removing one of the alternatives to Mr. Ocariz from our consideration, on the basis that "one of his partners is married to an AUSA here," and explained that, because of that personal relationshi