Epstein Secrets

ers of traditionally state concern, will continue to arise and will be answered case-by-case. As Justice O'Connor said in her dissent in Gonzales'. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 47 (2005), ". . . the task is to identify a mode of analysis that allows Congress to regulate more than nothing ... and less than every

uthern District of Florida 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Jeffrey Epstein Dear Messrs. Sloman, Menchel and Lourie and Ms. Villafafia: We write as counsel to Jeffrey Epstein to follow-up on our meeting on June 26, 2007. We thought the meeting was extremely produ

ers of traditionally state concern, will continue to arise and will be answered case-by-case. As Justice O'Connor said in her dissent in Gonzales I Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 47 (2005), ". . . the task is to identify a mode of analysis that allows Congress to regulate more than nothing ... and less than every

uthern District of Florida 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite-400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Jeffrey Epstein Dear Messrs. Sloman, Menchel and Lourie and Ms. Villafafia: We write as counsel to Jeffrey Epstein to follow-up on our meeting on June 26, 2007. We thought the meeting was extremely produ

at questioned whether Mr. Epstein would receive a rich man's justice. AUSA when stated that, in fact,

letter now accuses me of "manufacturing" charges of obstruction of justice, making obscene phone calls, and violating child privacy laws. When Mr. Lourie told you that those charges would "embarrass the Office," he meant that the Office was unwilling to bend the facts to satisfy Mr. Epstein's desired

s; suggested introducing the "15 yr-old" to his rich friend for "first-time" male-to- male sex; arran

llafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 8:49 AM To: Menthe', Matthew (USAFLS) Cc: Lourie, Andrew (USAFLS) Subject: Epstein Hi Matt - I had hoped to have a revised indictment for our discussion today but Mr. Black's motion has demanded

a highly sensitive case involving some Palm Beach rich guy.” 29 During his OPR interview, Sloman di

ion ............................................20 5. October 2006 – February 2007: Epstein’s Defense Counsel Initiate Contact with Villafaña, Lourie, and Sloman, and Press for a Meeting ....................................................................................22 6. February 2007:

e noted, “This case only resolved with the filthy rich bad guy going to jail because of your dedication

nt sitting on the shelf since May to engage in these negotiations. There has to be an ending date, and that date is Monday. Early that afternoon, Lourie—who was participating in the week’s negotiations from his new post at the Department in Washington, D.C.—asked Villafaña to furnish him with the las

IIthat if you did this 5 every weekend you'd be rich, didn't you? 6 A. No. That's what Lold me. 7

letter now accuses me of "manufacturing" charges of obstruction of justice, making obscene phone calls, and violating child privacy laws. When Mr. Lourie told you that those charges would "embarrass the Office," he meant that the Office was unwilling to bend the facts to satisfy Mr. Epstein's desired

tember 24, 2007 Email from J. Lefkowitz to M. Villafana. 22. Ms. Villafana replied that she had “forwarded your message only to Alex [Acosta], Andy [Lourie], and Rolando [Garcia]. I don’t anticipate it going any further than that.” Jd. 23. Ms. Villafana stated that the agreement would be “placed in the

at questioned whether Mr. Epstein would receive a rich man’s justice. AUSA Weinstein then stated that, i