Epstein Secrets

with an additional information, please do so throug and, in her absence On September 24, 2007, your client, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as numerous other nationally-renowned lawyers, including but not limited to Harvard Law Professor Alan D

ent, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as nu

m to be. It should be noted that the SDFL has never provided you with any evidence supporting its investigation. This is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160 (1970)). Ultimately, you requested an independent review. Subsequent to th

ional information, please do so through AUSA , and, in her absence, AUSA On September 24, 2007, your client, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as numerous other nationally-renowned lawyers, including but not limited to Harvard Law Professor Alan D

ent, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as nu

m to be, It should be noted that the SDFL has never provided you with any evidence supporting its investigation. This is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see North Carolina Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct: 160 (1970)). Ultimately, you requested an independent review. Subsequent to the

the SD v additional information, please do so timuge nd, in her absence, On September 24, 2007, your client, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as numerous other nationally-renowned lawyers, including but not limited to Harvard Law Professor Alan D

ent, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as nu

m to be. It should be noted that the SDFL has never provided you with any evidence supporting its investigation. This is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see North Carolina'. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 5.O. 160 (1970)). Ultimately, you requested an independent review. Subsequent to the

, Jeffrey Epstein and two of his lawyers, Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lily Ann Sanchez, Esq., in consultation

spondence, wherein you state that "we have reiterated in previous submissions that Mr. Epstein does not believe he is 'See July 6, 2007 letter from Gerald B. Lefcourt, Esq. and Alan Dershowitz. EFTA00176153 12/28/07 FRI 14:27 FAX 305 530 8440 EXECUTIVE OFFICE e002 guilty of the federal charges enumerated unde

5", clearly prevents Mr. Epstein from fulfilling the material terms and conditions the Agreement. As you lcnow, this is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see North Carolina I. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160 (1970)). Your reference to requiring "Mr. Epstein to in essence admit guilt

fyi From: Lourie, Andrew (USAFLS) Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:32 PM To: 'Gerald Lefcourt' Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein I have your letter. I think we are on the same page, but to be sure I do want to clarify that we spoke the other week

Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:32 PM To: 'Gerald Lefcourt' Subject: RE: Jeffrey Epstein I have your lette

m to be. It should be noted that the SDFL has never provided you with any evidence supporting its investigation. This is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see North Carolina Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160 (1970)). Ultimately, you requested an independent review. Subsequent to the

, please do so through AUSA Villafana, and, in her absence, AUSA Atkinson. On September 24, 2007, your client, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as numerous other nationally-renowned lawyers, including but not limited to Harvard Law Professor Alan Der

ent, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as num

m to be. It should be noted that the SDFL.has never provided you with any evidence supporting its investigation. This is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160 (1970)). Ultimately, you requested an independent review. Subsequent to the

ent, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as nu

please do so through AUSA Villafana, and, in her absence, AUSA Atkinson. On September 24, 2007, your client, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcourt, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as numerous other nationally-renowned lawyers, including but not limited to Harvard Law Professor Alan D

them to be, It should be noted that the SDFL has never provided you with any evidence suppolg its investigation. This is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see North Carolina Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct: 160 (1970)). Ultimately, you requested an independent review. Subsequent to the

spondence, wherein you state that "we have reiterated in previous submissions that Mr. Epstein does not believe he is 'See July 6, 2007 letter from Gerald B. Lefcourt, Esq. and Alan Dershowitz. Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-013363 EFTA00230268 12/28/07 FRI 14:27 FAX 305 530 6440 EXECUTIVE OFFICE 1002 guilty

was refused. Ms. Sanchez then contacted AUSA who agreed to meet with Mit an as well as a member fcourt. On February 1, 2007, Ms. Sanchez and Mr. Lefcourt met with AUSAs of the FBI, and presented defense counsel's view of the case and proms a willingness to assist in the investigation. The SDFL was u

55", clearly prevents Mr. Epstein from fulfilling the material terms and conditions the Agreement. As you know, this is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see North Carolina I Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160 (1970)). Your reference to requiring "Mr. Epstein to in essence admit guilt,

please do so through AUSA Villafana, and, in her absence, AUSA Atkinson. On September 24, 2007, your client, Jeffrey Epstein, in consultation with Gerald Lefcoun, Esq. and Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq., as well as numerous other nationally-renowned lawyers, including but not limited to Harvard Law Professor Alan D

em to be, It should be noted that the SDFL has never provided you with any evidence supportig its investigation. This is not, and has never been, an Alford plea situation (see North Carolina Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160 (1970)). Ultimately, you requested an independent review. Subsequent to the