Epstein Secrets

ory five-year period of incarceration. The current ten-year mandatory minimum was instituted in 2006. MIA_CEOS_00077 EFTA00191444 LAW °VICES OF GERALD B. LEFCOURT. P.C. Jeffrey Sloman, Esq. Matthew Menchel, Esq. Andrew Lourie, Esq. A. Marie Villafafia, Esq. The United States Attorney's Office Southern Dis

itional step, even before any sexual activity and regardless of whether one ever takes place. MIA_CE0S_00092 EFTA00191459 LAW OIACCS OF ERALD a LEFCOURT. PC. Jeffrey Sloman, Esq. Matthew Menchel, Esq. Andrew Lourie, Esq. A. Marie Villafaiia, Esq. The United States Attorney's Office Southern Dist

0) (excerpts attached as Exhibit 29) Later, Dershowitz would write to tell the Justice Department that "Epstein never targeted minors." Letter from Gerald Lefcourt & Alan Dershowitz, July 6, 2007 to U.S. Atty.'s Office for the S.D. Fla (attached as Exhibit 30). Now, nearly a decade later, there should be no doubt

far the federal government may go into matters 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

D Docket 02/10/2016 Page 2 of 2 (USAFLS) From: Lilly Ann Sanchez ([email protected] Sent: Friday .lanuary M 7007 4:05 PM To: (USAFLS) Cc: Gerald Letcourl Subject: Jeffrey Epstein Illt hope you had a great holiday season. Gerald Lefcourt and I would like to speak with you early next week on the Epst

Illt hope you had a great holiday season. Gerald Lefcourt and I would like to speak with you early next wee

y=en... 6/28/2007. MIA_CEOS_00081 EFTA00184639 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361-46 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 7 of 24 LAW OIPICto or ERALD B. LEFCOURT, P.C. Jeffrey Mi sq. Matthew Esq. Andrew Lourie, Esq. A. Villafafia, Esq. The United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida J

far the federal government may go into matters of traditionally state concern, will continue to arise and ill be answered case-by-case. As Justice O'Connor said in her dissent in Gonzales. Rakh, 545 U.S. 1, 47 (2005), ".. . the task is to identify a mode of analysis that allows Congress to regulate mor

even when the information would incriminate the client "in the very case in which the Firm was engaged to provide criminal defense representation." Gerald B. Lefcourt, P.C. v. United States , 125 F.3d 79, 87 (2d Cir. 1997). In that case, Attorney Lefcourt refused to identify in an IRS reporting form a client who p

aged to provide criminal defense representation." Gerald B. Lefcourt, P.C. v. United States , 125 F.3d 79, 87 (2d Cir. 1997). In that case, Attorney Lefcourt refused to identify in an IRS reporting form a client who paid him more than $10,000 cash, and Lefcourt was fined $25,000. Lefcourt sought to avoid

t's earlier cases [referring to Boyd ], have been discredited by later opinions." Andresen v. Maryland , 427 U.S. 463, 472 (1976). In 1984, Justice O'Connor wrote a concurring opinion in United States v. Doe , 465 U.S. 605 (1984), just to make explicit what is implicit in the analysis of that opinion; t

even when the information would incriminate the client "in the very case in which the Firm was engaged to provide criminal defense representation." Gerald B. Lefcourt, P.C. I United States , 125 F.3d 79, 87 (2d Cir. 1997). In that case, Attorney Lefcourt refused to identify in an IRS reporting form a client who pa

gaged to provide criminal defense representation." Gerald B. Lefcourt, P.C. I United States , 125 F.3d 79, 87 (2d Cir. 1997). In that case, Attorney Lefcourt refused to identify in an IRS reporting form a client who paid him more than $10,000 cash, and Lefcourt was fined $25,000. Lefcourt sought to avoid

rt's earlier cases [referring to Boyd ], have been discredited by later opinions." Andresen I Maryland , 427 U.S. 463, 472 (1976). In 1984, Justice O'Connor wrote a concurring opinion in United States I Doe , 465 U.S. 605 (1984), just to make explicit what is implicit in the analysis of that opinion; th

et with counsel for Mr. Epstein. Sincerely, R. Alexander Acosta United States Attorney ...••••••• By: Chief, Criminal Division cc: Roy Black Gerald B. Lefcourt R. Alexander Acosta EFTA00179084 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA IN RE GRAND JURY SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM NUMBERS OLY

aged to provide criminal defense representation." Gerald B. Lefcourt, P.C. v. United States, 125 F.3d 79, 87 (2d Cir. 1997). In that case, Attorney Lefcourt refused to identify in an IRS reporting form a client who paid him more than $10,000 cash, and Lefcourt was fined $25,000. Lefcourt sought to avoid

ourt's earlier cases [referring to Boyd], have been discredited by later opinions." Andresen v. Maryland, 427 U.S. 463, 472 (1976). In 1984, Justice O'Connor wrote a concurring opinion in United States v. Doe, 465 U.S. 605 (1984), just to make explicit what is implicit in the analysis of that opinion; th

48 EAST 78Th NEW YORE, NEW YORK 10021 GERALD B. LEFCOURT [email protected] SHERYL E. REICH NIcle

far the federal government may go into matters 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

w York, NY 10022 WIRty represented by Gerald B. Lefcourt Law Office Gerald B. Lefcourt 148 East 78th Str

depositions, this Court has the power and duty under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) to determine the most appropriate location for each deposition. See e.g., O'Connor.. Trans Union Corp., 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6774 (E.D. Pa. May 11, 1998). This Court has previously determined "that as a general rule, if a deponen

T 78" STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10021 GERALD B. LEFCOURT lefccitul@letcourtlaw corn SHERYL E. REICH Nid

far the federal government may go into matters 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 'Raid?, 545 U.S. 1, 47 (2005), ". . . the task is to identify a mode of analysis that allows Congress to regulate m

18" STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10021 GERALD B. LEFCOURT SHERYL C. REICH RENATO C. STABILE FAITH A. FRI

far the federal government may go into matters 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 v. Balch, 545 U.S. 1, 47 (2005), ". . . the task is to identify a mode of analysis that allows Congress to regulate

nt purposes. And §2422(a), unlike subsection (b), carries no mandatory minimum sentence, let alone ten years. EFTA00284189 ♦— ornocs or GERALD a LEFCOURT, PC United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida July 6, 2007 Page 16 first prove that Murrell, using the internet, acted with a

far the federal government may go into matters 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 v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 47 (2005), ". . the task is to identify a mode of analysis that allows Congress to regulate m