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

s used by the defendant, an all but irrefutable case showing the clear knowledge and intent of the defendant. A prototypical case is United States' Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2001), where the defendant participated, over time, in instant messaging, e-mail, and follow-up telephone calls with a pers

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

s used by the defendant, an all but irrefutable case showing the clear knowledge and intent of the defendant. A prototypical case is United States' Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2001), where the defendant participated, over time, in instant messaging, e-mail, and follow-up telephone calls with a pers

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

s used by the defendant, an all but irrefutable case showing the clear knowledge and intent of the defendant. A prototypical case is United States' Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2001), where the defendant participated, over time, in instant messaging, e-mail, and follow-up telephone calls with a pers

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

s used by the defendant, an all but irrefutable case showing the clear knowledge and intent of the defendant. A prototypical case is United States' Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2001), where the defendant participated, over time, in instant messaging, e-mail, and follow-up telephone calls with a pers

ld" neighbor; arrested in hotel where supposed to meet. • Not Consummated Showed up for meeting Sting Conviction affirmed. 87 EFTA01729571 I LEFCOURT'S LIST EFTA01729572

. by private organization 9 EFTA01729493 COStiT.-; o " " )., ' PPe≥-em tMoittkiccig co.. A1v!. . .. , p,watqw:, • . 5th Cir. U.S. v. Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2001) Internet Defendant met "14 yr-old"through IM chat; defendant kept in contact with her through Internet and attemp

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

used by the defendant, an all but irrefutable case showing the clear knowledge and intent of the defendant. A prototypical case is United States v. Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5th Cir. 2001), where the defendant participated, over time, in instant messaging, e-mail, and follow-up telephone calls with a pers

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

used by the defendant, an all but irrefutable case showing the clear knowledge and intent of the defendant. A prototypical case is United States v. Farner, 251 F.3d 510 (5* Cir. 2001), where the defendant participated, over time, in instant messaging, e-mail, and follow-up telephone calls with a perso