Epstein Secrets

Subsequently, Ms. 4 08-80736-CV-MARRA RFP WPB 001657 EFTA00209836 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP emailed the defense stating that United States Attorney Acosta would accept no ess than 18 months of incarceration, following by a one-year term of house arrest. Federal Prosecutors Misrepresented the Number of

rom beci ninr public." See Tab 27, September 24, 2007 Email from J. Lefkowitz to M. 22. Ms. replied that she had "forwarded your message only to Alex [Acosta], Andy [Lourie], and Rolando [Garcia]. I don't anticipate it going any further than that." Id. 23. Ms. stated that the agreement would be "placed

matters related -to these subpoenas with other attorneys. Thank you again for your assistance. cc: E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, FBI By: Sincerely, R. Alexander Acosta United States Att A. Marie Assistant United States Attorney 08-80736-CV-MARRA RFP WPB 001698 EFTA00209877 05/15/2007 16:57 FAX 5618021787 US

l court decisions watering down the "for the purpose of " requi ment fly in the face of the two Suprems Court decisions addressing that element. See Hansen'. Huff, 291 U.S. 559 (1934); Mortensen. United States, 322 U.S. 369 (1944). Santos and Cuellar speak loudly and clearly against prosecutors seeing

re wrongly decided. In her Complaint, Jane Doe #101 asserted that Epstein had been convicted of state law crimes and, taking language directly from Alex Acosta's letter to Lilly Ann Sanchez, wrote that Epstein "is in the same position as if he had been tried and convicted of the sexual offenses committed agai

d and explained to him. Epstein hereby states that be understands the conditions of this Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: By: Dated: 77P/4" Dated: Dated: A. MARIE VTLLAFARA ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY OERALD LEFCOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL T

V-MARRA P-01379 EFTA00192925 Dispoto, Mark (USAFLS) From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Carlton, Stephen (USAFLS) Wednesday, May 8, 2019 4:53 PM Acosta, Diana (USAFLS); Bella, Gabrielle (USAFLS); Cannon, Aileen (USAFLS); Coxless, Kelly (USAFLS); Funk Daniel (USAFLS); Gyires, Marton (USAFLS); Hem, M

Page 28 of 36 the same act are intended to have the same meaning.") (quotation and citation omitted). Two Mann Act cases are particularly apt. In Hansen', Half, 291 U.S. 559 (1934), the Government charged the defendant with violating the Mann Act after she returned to the country with a man with who

that the United States Attorney could bring this case in the exercise of his federal discretion should he so choose ("we conclude that U.S. Attorney Acosta could properly use his discretion to authorize prosecution in this case."). (CEOS letter at p. 2). However, CEOS drew the conclusion that the 3505-

p this from limit public." See Tab 27, September 24, 2007 Email from J. Leficowitz to,. 22. -replied that she had "forwarded your message only to Alex [Acosta], [ , and I don't anticipate it going any further than that." Id. 23. stated that the agreement would be "placed in the case file, which will be

court decisions watering down the "for the purpose of " requirement fly in the face of the two Supreme Court decisions addressing that element. See Hansen v. Huff, 291 U.S. 559 (1934); Mortensen v. United States, 322 U.S. 369 (1944). Santos and Cuellar speak loudly and clearly against prosecutors seei

U HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY AT: (213) 680-8400. To: Company: United States Attorney's Office Hon. R. Alexander Acosta Southern District of Florida Fax 0: (305) 530-6444 Wrest (305) 961-9100 From: Date: Kenneth W. Starr Pages *town December 7, 2007 34 (21

nited States Attorney's Office Hon. R. Alexander Acosta Southern District of Florida Fax 0: (305) 530-

t to engage in sexual activity with a minor in another state. The travel must be for the purpose of engaging in the unlawful sexual act. See also Hansen,. Huff, 291 U.S. 559, 562-63 (1934) and Mortensen I. United States, 322 U.S. 369, 374 (1944) ("An intention that the women or girls shall engage in

d and explained to him. Epstein hereby states that he understands the conditions of this Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: Dated: Dated: By: A. MARIE VILLAFARA ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY GERALD LEFCOURT, BSQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN

ure; THEREFORE, on the authority of It Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney for the Southern Distric

with relatively little disruption, continue to operate their highly lucrative business from any number of overseas locations"); • United States v. Hansen, 108 F. App'x 331 (6th Cir. 2004) (affirming district court order of pretrial release of defendant, a resident and citizen of Denmark-from where def

d and explained to him. Epstein hereby states that he understands the conditions of this Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: Dated: Dated: By: A. MARIE VILLAFARA ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY GERALD LEFCOURT, BSQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN

ure; THEREFORE, on the authority of It Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney for the Southern Distric

with relatively little disruption, continue to operate their highly lucrative business from any number of overseas locations"); • United States v. Hansen, 108 F. App'x 331 (6th Cir. 2004) (affirming district court order of pretrial release of defendant, a resident and citizen of Denmark-from where def

h lines respectively of Lot 40, containing 0.07 acres, more or Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 1594(b). A TRUE BILL. FOREPERSON R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY A. VILLAFARA ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 54 EFTA00225786 (e) difficulty; has been commingled with other propert

would amount to what would be seen by the public as "mansion arrest". Such reasoning had no bearing on the Petite analysis and clearly violated Mr. Acosta's stated policy of horizontal equality. Treating Mr. Epstein differently from any other similarly charged individual simply because of his wealth di

e of § 2423 Cases, ixhibit 30, and make this case more like Hansen Half, 291 U.S. 559 (1934), and Mortensen United States, 322 U.S. 369 (1944). In Hansen, the Supreme Court rejected charges against a woman traveling back to her home in the United States to "continue her irregular and improper conduct

violations granted $100,000 personal recognizance bond, secured by $10,000 cash, with electronic monitoring and other conditions); United States v. Acosta, 16-mj-08569-UA (S.D.N.Y Mar. 29, 2016) (denying the Government's detention application after argument and granting defendant charged with 18 U.S.C

United States v. Esposito, 309 F. Supp. 3d 24 (S.D.N.Y. 2018) 21 United States v. Friedman, 837 F.2d 48 (2d Cir. 1988) 13, 18 United States v. Hansen, 108 F. App'x 331 (6th Cir. 2004) 16 United States v. Hanson, 613 F. Supp. 2d 85 (D.D.C. 2009) 16 United States v. Karni, 298 F. Supp. 2d 129

l court decisions watering down the “for the purpose of “ requirement fly in the face of the two Supreme Court decisions addressing that element. See Hansen v. Huff, 291 U.S. 559 (1934); Mortensen v. United States, 322 U.S. 369 (1944). Santos and Cuellar speak loudly and clearly against prosecutors seeing

sequently, Ms. 4 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012163 --- PAGE BREAK --- KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Villafana emailed the defense stating that United States Attorney Acosta would accept no less than 18 months of incarceration, following by a one-year term of house arrest. Federal Prosecutors Misrepresented the Number of

lic.” See Tab 27, September 24, 2007 Email from J. Lefkowitz to M. Villafana. 22. Ms. Villafana replied that she had “forwarded your message only to Alex [Acosta], Andy [Lourie], and Rolando [Garcia]. I don’t anticipate it going any further than that.” Jd. 23. Ms. Villafana stated that the agreement would be