Epstein Secrets

EPH ABRUZZO, CLERK. 3Y27/2023 4:10:49 PM I 27. When the FBI commenced its own investigation, then-U.S. Attorney for the Southern District ofFlorida, Alexander Acosta, asked First Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman whether it was “appropriate to approach [State Attorney Krischer] and give him a heads up re wher

l be leakedstraight to Epstein.” i Appendix at 3 (OPR Report, p. 21). 5. The Infamous Non-Prosecution Agreement: “Please Tell Me You Are Joking.” 28. Acosta was well aware that the PBPD brought the case to the FBI’s attention because of a concern that the State Attorney’s Office had succumbed to “pressure

cation of grand jury interests is hot ‘some talisman that dissolves all constitutional protections."'Butterworth, 494 U.S. at 630—31 (quoting U.S, v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1, 11 (1973)); see also Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Virginia, 435 U.S, 829, 838 (1978) (balancing state’s interest in preserving confi

o appear and provide testimony and evidence in accordance with the issued subpoenas at the next meeting of the Grand Jury. Respectfully submitted, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: Assistant United States Attorne West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: Facsimile: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY

rand Jury. Respectfully submitted, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: Assistant United

ccordingly, it is a well-recognized principle that courts should not intervene in the grand jury process absent compelling reason. United States v. Dionisio , 410 U.S. 1, 16-18 (1973). A district court also should be mindful of a target's attempts to "saddle a grand jury with mini-trials and preliminary

by Ms. Sanchez prior to Mr. Richey's appearance as counsel for Mr...I cc: , Esq. William Richey, Esq. Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq. B Sincerely, R. Alexander Acosta Assistant United States Attorney EFTA00178979 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida 500 South Austral

ly Ann Sanchez, Esq. B Sincerely, R. Alexander Acosta Assistant United States Attorney EFTA00178979

R. Crim. P. Rule 17(c). See, e.g., R. Enterprises, 498 U.S. at 299 (Rule 17(c) requires that grand jury subpoenas be reasonable); United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1, 11 (1973) ("[t]he Fourth Amendment provides protection against a grand jury subpoena duces tecum too sweeping in its terms to be regar

Ile...LeneA nein Black srcbmck. Kornsparl & Stumpf EFTA00179082 U.S. Department Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY VIA FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq. Fowler White Burnett 1395 Brickell Ave Fl 14 Miami Florida 33131-3300 Re: Jeffre

ANN SANCHEZ, ESQ. AUGUST 3, 2007 PAGE 2 Please let us know your client's decision by no later than August 17. I have conferred with U.S. Attorney Acosta who has asked me to communicate that the two-year term of incarceration is a non-negotiable minimum to vindicate a federal interest, and, at this ti

Accordingly, it is a well-recognized principle that courts should not intervene in the grand jury process absent compelling reason. United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1, 16-18 (1973). A district court also should be mindful of a target's attempts to "saddle a grand jury with mini-trials and preliminary