Epstein Secrets

500 S. Australian Ave, Ste 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 Facsimile: (561) 820-8777 February 11, 2010 DELIVERY BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Roy Black, Esq. Black Srebnick Komspan & Stumpf P.A. 201 S. Biscayne Blvd, Suite 1300 Miami, FL 33131 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Mr. Black: Thank you for

basis for a prompt resolution of any issue not resolved by the parties through further discussions. Respectfully submitted, MARTIN WEINBERG, ESQ. ROY SLACK, ESQ. /wg cc: Jeffrey Sloman, Esq. Robert Senior, Esq. Black, Srebnick, Kornspan & Stumpf, P.A. EFTA00194765 ROY BLACK HOWARD M. SREBNICK S

o be interpreted in favor of the defendants subjected to them. See United States I . Gradwell, 243 U.S. 476, 485, 37 5.O. 407, 61 L.Ed. 857 (1917); McBoyle . United States, 283 U.S. 25, 27, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 (1931); United States'. Bass, 404 U.S. 336, 347-349, 92 S.Ct. 515, 30 L.Ed.2d 488 (197

ROY BIACK HOWARD M. SREBNICK SCOTT A. KORNSPAN LARRY A. srumpt. MARIA NEYRA JACKIE PERCZEK MARK A.J. SHAPIRO JARED LOPEZ Jeff Sloman, Esq. United Stat

o be interpreted in favor of the defendants subjected to them. See United States v. Gradwell, 243 U.S. 476, 485, 37 S.Ct. 4O7, 61 L.Ed. 857 (1917); McBoyle v. United States, 283 U.S. 25, 27, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 (1931); United States v. Bass, 404 U.S. 336, 347-349, 92 S.Ct. 515, 30 L.Ed.2d 488 (1

ROY BIACK HOWARD M. SREBNICK Scott A. KORNSPAN LARRY A. STUMPF MARIA NEYRA JACKIE PERCZEK MARK A.J. SHAPIRO JARED LOPEZ Jeff Sloman, Esq. United State

o be interpreted in favor of the defendants subjected to them. See United States v. Gradwell, 243 U.S. 476, 485, 37 S.Ct. 4O7, 61 L.Ed. 857 (1917); McBoyle v. United States, 283 U.S. 25, 27, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 (1931); United States v. Bass, 404 U.S. 336, 347-349, 92 S.Ct. 515, 30 L.Ed.2d 488 (1

d Tactics in Disregard of the United States Attorney's Manual are Used 9. In June 2007, subpoenaed the investigating agent of Epstein's attorney, Roy Black, in a clear effort to invade the defense camp. The subpoena was specifically drafted to discover the investigator's contacts with all prospective wi

ill understand, of what the law intends to do if a certain line is passed.'" Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, 544 U.S. 696, 703 (2005) (quoting McBoyle v. United States, 283 U.S. 25, 27 (1931)) (citation omitted). Two recent Supreme Court decisions dramatically underscore these principles and help

will understand, of what the law intends to do if a certain line is passed.”” Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, 544 U.S. 696, 703 (2005) (quoting McBoyle v. United States, 283 USS. 25, 27 (1931)) (citation omitted), Two recent Supreme Court decisions dramatically underscore these principles and help t

s in Disregard of the United States Attorney’s Manual are Used In June 2007, AUSA Villafana subpoenaed the investigating agent of Epstein’s attomey, Roy Black, in a clear effort to invade the defense camp. The subpoena was specifically drafted to discover the investigator’s contacts, with all prospective wi