Epstein Secrets

one call to a telephone used by Jane Doe #2. (18) On or about May 2, 2004, Defendant placed a telephone call to a telephone used by Jane pcie #2. Jane Doe -43 (19) In or around 2003, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN masturbated in the presence of Jane Doe #3, who was then a fifteen-year-old girl. 10 EFTA002246

masturbated in the presence ()bane Doe #7, who was then a sixteen-year-old girl. (61) In or around July 2004, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN instructed Jane Doe #7, who was then a sixteen-year-old girl, to rub his nipples. (62) In or around July 2004, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN stroked the vagina of Jane Doe #7

ay upstairs to Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN's bedroom at 358 El Brillo Way. (113) In or around the last half of 2004, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN asked Jane Doe #I4 to provide her telephone number. 22 EFTA00224695 (114) In or around the last half of 2004, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN instructed Jane Doe #14, wh

Palm Beach (head of the West Palm Beach branch office), after serving as the interim Chief of the Public Integrity Section at DOJ at the request of AAG Fisher. By October 2007 Mr. would leave command were Criminal Division Chief, First Assistant USA the SDFL to become AG Fi her's Chief of Staffs Above M

asturbated in the presence of Jane Doe #7, who was then a sixteen-year-old girl. (61) In or around July 2004, Defendant JEFFREY EPSTEIN instructed Jane Doe #7, who was then a sixteen-year-old girl, to rub his nipples. nti (62) In or around July 2004, Defe JEFFREY EPSTEIN stroked the vagina of Jane Doe #

0 days to appeal the decision to the Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Alice Fisher. As you recall, you chose to forego an appeal to AAG Fisher, and instead pursued a negotiated resolution which, ultimately, resulted in the execution of the Agreement. The Negotiation Phase During negotiati

M1SS!SSIPPI• SOUTH CAROLINA • TENNESSEE • TEXAS • VIRGINIA • WASHINGTON, D.C. EFTA00225541 Laura Ingersol

ons under the terms of the NPA. I then worked to find pro bono counsel for those victims (Exhibit B-23). On May 15, 2008, CEOS, DAAG Mandelker, and AAG Fisher completed their review, finding that our case against Epstein was neither improper nor inappropriate (Exhibit B-24). By that time, a revised indict

an threatened to send to an undisclosed list of “victims.” The eventual transmission of this highly misleading letter was only halted by an appeal to AAG Fisher. Among those substantive objections (which related to far more than the “time and place” of the state’s sentencing hearing) were: o Sending the lett

of 188 months. e Facing Ms. Villafana’s threatened draconian indictment, without the claimed offer of the right to raise objections in an appeal to AAG Fisher, the defense chose to negotiate an HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012176 --- PAGE BREAK --- KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Agreement to Defer Prosecution to the State, an

394 ‘ORGE G. RI r Gepraoe ST ERE CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA 25333-3304 REBECCA A. BETTS oehiae 500 LEE STREET