Epstein Secrets

est Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberg®podhurst.com kezell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691

ell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

penalty ... if, in fact, someone ... is caught and convicted.") (emphasis added). Accordingly, Masha's Law cannot lawfully be applied in this case. The Eleventh Circuit's decision in United States v. Siegel, 153 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 1998), is virtually on point. hi Siegel the defendant pleaded guilty to charges under

est Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberg®podhurst.com kezell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691

ell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

penalty ... if, in fact, someone ... is caught and convicted.") (emphasis added). Accordingly, Masha's Law cannot lawfully be applied in this case. The Eleventh Circuit's decision in United States v. Siegel, 153 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 1998), is virtually on point. hi Siegel the defendant pleaded guilty to charges under

est Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 rjosefsberg®podhurst.com kezell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691

ell®podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

penalty ... if, in fact, someone ... is caught and convicted.") (emphasis added). Accordingly, Masha's Law cannot lawfully be applied in this case. The Eleventh Circuit's decision in United States v. Siegel, 153 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 1998), is virtually on point. hi Siegel the defendant pleaded guilty to charges under

ert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Esq. Podhurst Orsecic, P.A. 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800 Fax• 105 15R-910 Counsellor Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 FL 33401-5012 Fax• 561-R15-R691 Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey E

Fax• 105 15R-910 Counsellor Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

penalty ... if, in fact, someone ... is caught and convicted.") (emphasis added). Accordingly, Masha's Law cannot lawfully be applied in this case. The Eleventh Circuit's decision in United States v. Siegel, 153 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 1998), is virtually on point. hi Siegel the defendant pleaded guilty to charges under

est Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 [email protected] kezell@podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691

ell@podhursicom Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Au

penalty ... if, in fact, someone ... is caught and convicted.") (emphasis added). Accordingly, Masha's Law cannot lawfully be applied in this case. The Eleventh Circuit's decision in United States v. Siegel, 153 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 1998), is virtually on point. hi Siegel the defendant pleaded guilty to charges under

st Flagler Street, Suite 800 Miami, FL 33130 305 358-2800 Fax: 305 358-2382 [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. 250 Australian Avenue South Suite 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5012 561-659-8300 Fax: 561-835-8691

ry, Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. One Clearlake Centre, Suite 1400 250 Australian Ave S. West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5015 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Mr. Goldberger: Pursuant to the terms of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida hereby provides y

penalty ... if, in fact, someone ... is caught and convicted.") (emphasis added). Accordingly, Masha's Law cannot lawfully be applied in this case. The Eleventh Circuit's decision in United States I, Siegel 153 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 1998), is virtually on point. In Siegel, the defendant pleaded guilty to charges under

arey had on June 1, 2006, with ASA regarding a meeting earlier that day between representatives of the State Attorney's Office and defense attorney Jack Goldberger (Police Report at 87). Omitted are the facts of the meeting (Police Report at 87): In addition to the presence of other defense counsel, there was i

tate Attorney's Office and defense attorney Jack Goldberger (Police Report at 87). Omitted are the facts of t

gainst strict liability, especially since it applies in eases whcre there is no sexual contact at all with any person, let alone with a real minor. The Eleventh Circuit's decision in United States Murrell, supra, reflects this same understanding of the statute. The Murrell court wrote that, under the "plain language"

those words have real meaning by providing a telling example of an inadequate State process: "a state prosecution for assault and battery in a Mr. Goldberger. In short, it is hard to imagine how the recusal of an assistant to the lead prosecutor could have resulted in any advantage to Mr. Epstein; more to

Leflcowitz attaching draft Deferred Prosecution Agreement, Exhibit 32. 17 While federal prosecutors once suggested that Mr. Epstein's retention of Jack Goldberger was intended to trigger the recusal of assistant prosecutor Dahlia Weiss and thereby influence the outcome of the State prosecution, that assertion

at (a) force or coercion would be used to cause Owens to engage in a criminal sex act or (b) that Owens was under the age of 18." (emphasis added). The Eleventh Circuit's interpretation of the statute makes perfect sense: were § 1591 not limited in that fashion, it would threaten to criminalize a host of localized be