Epstein Secrets

t's investigation was resolved when it entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with Epstein, which was negotiated under the supervision of R. Alexander Acosta, then United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida ("SDFL"), and approved by senior levels of Main Justice, including the Office of

le in the Miami Herald reported detailed allegations, including from attorneys representing plaintiffs in civil litigation, about Epstein's conduct, Acosta's handling of the 2006 investigation, the process by which the NPA had been negotiated, and its substantive terms. In the wake of the article, the

wever, the government "must bear the burden for any lack of clarity in the agreement and ambiguities should be resolved in favor of the defendant." Innes v. Dalsheim, 864 F.2d 974, 979 (2d Cir. 1988). Here, the NPA unambiguously precludes prosecution of Epstein's potential co- conspirators, and the in

t's investigation was resolved when it entered into I Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with Epstein, which was negotiated under the supervision of R. Alexander Acosta, then United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida ("SDFL"), and approved by senior levels of Main Justice, including the Office of

le in the Miami Herald reported detailed allegations, including from attorneys representing plaintiffs in civil litigation, about Epstein's conduct, Acosta's handling of the 2006 investigation, the process by which the NPA had been negotiated, and its substantive terms. In the wake of the article, the

wever, the government "must bear the burden for any lack of clarity in the agreement and ambiguities should be resolved in favor of the defendant." Innes v. Dalsheim, 864 F.2d 974, 979 (2d Cir. 1988). Here, the NPA unambiguously precludes prosecution of Epstein's potential co- conspirators, and the in

ALOW 400 14. Ashley DrivesSuite I 100aTampa. FL 33602 813-984-3060 (Phone)•813-984-3010 (Fax) Toll Free: 866-395-7100 facsimile transmittal To: R. Alexander Acosta, Eiq. Judith Stevenson Arco, Esq. Michael McAuliffe, Esq. Jack Alan Coldberger, Esq. Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. William J. Berger, Esq. From: »mi

95-7100 facsimile transmittal To: R. Alexander Acosta, Eiq. Judith Stevenson Arco, Esq. Michael McAuli

Second Circuit has stated, Icjomparing a criminal defend- ant to a merchant in the marketplace is an inappro- priate analogy that we have rejected." Innes v. Dalsheitn, 864 F.2d 974, 978 (2d Cir.1988), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 809, 110 S.Ct. 50, 107 L.Ed.2d 19 (1989). See United States v. Khan, 920 F.2