Epstein Secrets

States Attorney's Office Hon. R. Alexander Acosta (305) 530-6444 Southern District of Florida Pages From: Date; Fax It: Direct Si: arintir Kenneth W. Starr December 5, 2007 3 (213) 680-8500 Message: Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-013339 EFTA00230244 12/05/07 WED 15:24 FAX 1 213 880 8500 KIRKLAND&

ent e-mails and letters regarding victim notification and other issues. Some of these issues also are addressed in the U.S. Attorney's letter to Mr. Starr, but in light of our discussions, I believe a separate response is needed. In a recent e-mail, you write that you were surprised at the tone of my

r. See October 9, 2007 New York Post article attached at Tab C. Prior to signing the Non-Prosecution Agreement, Mr. Epstein's defense team included Ken Starr, Jay Lefkowitz, , Alan Dershowitz, Gerald Lefcourt, Roy Black, Guy Lewis, Martin Weinberg, Jack Goldberger, Stephanie Thacker", and the associates

er. See October 9, 2007 New York Post article attached at Tab C. Prior to signir the Non-Prosec tion Agreement, Mr. Epstein's defense team included Ken Start, Jay Lefkowitz, , Alan Dershowitz, Gerald Lefcourt, Roy Black, Guy Lewis, Martin Weinberg, Jack Goldberger, Stephanie Thacker', and the associates

that neutrality to create a false impression that we do not believe in the validity of the victims' claims. 2You may want to review United States'. Crompton Corp., 399 F. Supp. 2d 1047 (ND. Cal. 2005), where the district court would not allow an unindicted co-conspirator to have his name redacted from a plea

ent e-mails and letters regarding victim notification and other issues. Some of these issues also are addressed in the U.S. Attorney's letter to Mr. Starr, but in light of our discussions, I believe a separate response is needed. In a recent e-mail, you write that you were surprised at the tone of my

atute, your statement that our notification must be limited only to the right to restitution is incorrect. nYou may want to review United States v. Crompton Corp. , 399 F. Supp. 2d 1047 (N.D. Cal. 2005), where the district court would not allow an unindicted co-conspirator to have his name redacted from a plea

ent e-mails and letters regarding victim notification and other issues. Some of these issues also are addressed in the U.S. Attorney's letter to Mr. Starr, but in light of our discussions, I believe a separate response is needed. In a recent e-mail, you write that you were surprised at the tone of my

eld and a sword? Thus, while we will not involve ourselves in the civil litigation, we will not allow you to 2You may want to review United States. Crompton Corp., 399 F. Supp. 2d 1047 (N.D. Cal. 2005), where the district court would not allow an unindicted co-conspirator to have his EFTA00221297 JAY P. LEF

ent e-mails and letters regarding victim notification and other issues. Some of these issues also are addressed in the U.S. Attorney's letter to Mr. Starr, but in light of our discussions, I believe a separate response is needed. In a recent e-mail, you write that you were surprised at the tone of my

statute, your statement that our notification must be limited only to the right to restitution is incorrect. You may want to review United States. Crompton Corp. , 399 F. Supp. 2d 1047 (N.D. Cal. 2005), where the district court would not allow an unindicted co-conspirator to have his name redacted from a plea

ent e-mails and letters regarding victim notification and other issues. Some of these issues also are addressed in the U.S. Attorney's letter to Mr. Starr, but in light of our discussions, I believe a separate response is needed. In a recent e-mail, you write that you were surprised at the tone of my

statute, your statement that our notification must be limited only to the right to restitution is incorrect. nYou may want to review United States. Crompton Corp. , 399 F. Supp. 2d 1047 (N.D. Cal. 2005), where the district court would not allow an unindicted co-conspirator to have his name redacted from a plea