Epstein Secrets

ce e-mails attached Suppl. Box 3 P-013847 Thru P-013849 E-mail to and September 18, 2007, 11:43 , RE: Draft Agreements?, with e-mail from Jay Leflcowitz (September 18, 2007, 11:09 M. attached Atty work-product Suppl. Box 3 P-013850 E-mail, to Alex Acosta and September 18, 2007, 9:31 RE: Epste

torney handwritten notes Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Suppl. Box #3 P-013334 Thru P-013337 File folder entitled "11/13/07 Sloman to Lefkowitz (was this sent?" containing draft 11/13/07 letter from responding to J. Lefkowitz's letter Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Page 2 of 14

P-013334 Thru P-013337 File folder entitled "11/13/07 Sloman to Lefkowitz (was this sent?" containing draft 11/13/07 letter from responding to J. Lefkowitz's letter Attorney-Client Privilege Work Product Page 2 of 14 EFTA00185415 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 216-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/20

o [DE 48) Exhibit I (Exhibit 29). 6 EFTA00185463 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 7 of 57 hearing on the Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victims' Rights Act, Jane Doe I and Jane Doe 2 were in the courtroom to learn for the first time that the federal case had been resolved. The undisputed facts show tha

orney's Office has not produced any emails sent to or from any home e-mail addresses of its prosecutors. 30. On September 17, 2007, defense counsel Jay Leflcowitz responded: "[D]o you have another obstruction proffer I can review that you have drafted? Also, if we go that route, would you intend to make the d

tempted to notify or confer with the victims about the existence of the NPA. 35. On September 23, 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent an email to Lefkowitz stating: "It is factually accurate that the list we are going to give you are persons we have identified as victims. If we did not think they were

13 [DE 481 Exhibit I (Exhibit 29). 6 EFTA00804333 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 7 of 57 hearing on the Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victims' Rights Act, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 were in the courtroom to learn for the first time that the federal case had been resolved. The undisputed facts show tha

orney's Office has not produced any emails sent to or from any home e-mail addresses of its prosecutors. 30. On September 17, 2007, defense counsel Jay Leflcowitz responded: "[D]o you have another obstruction proffer I can review that you have drafted? Also, if we go that route, would you intend to make the d

tempted to notify or confer with the victims about the existence of the NPA. 35. On September 23, 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent an email to Lefkowitz stating: "It is factually accurate that the list we are going to give you are persons we have identified as victims. If we did not think they were

13 [DE 481 Exhibit I (Exhibit 29). 6 EFTA00591610 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 7 of 57 hearing on the Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victims' Rights Act, Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 were in the courtroom to learn for the first time that the federal case had been resolved. The undisputed facts show tha

that arises out of the ongoing federal investigation as described above."41 29. On September 17, 2007, the line prosecutor wrote to defense counsel Jay Lefkowitz: "Please send [a document] to my home e-mail address — [redacted] and give me a call on my cell [redacted] so I can be ready for some discussions t

tempted to notify or confer with the victims about the existence of the NPA. 35. On September 23, 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office sent an email to Lefkowitz stating: "It is factually accurate that the list we are going to give you are persons we have identified as victims. If we did not think they were

13 [DE 48] Exhibit I (Exhibit 29). 6 EFTA00184229 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016 Page 7 of 57 hearing on the Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victims' Rights Act, Jane Doe I and Jane Doe 2 were in the courtroom to learn for the first time that the federal case had been resolved. The undisputed facts show tha