Epstein Secrets

ice" in § 3771(a)(5) is 3 Jane Doe No. 2's exculpatory statements regarding Epstein were not lost on his attorneys. A December 21, 2007 letter from Jay Lefkowitz, one of Epstein's attorneys, to U.S. Attorney Acosta, devoted two pages examining Jane Doe No. 2's interview testimony on April 24, 2007. Ex. D at

by Epstein's attorneys to the Deputy Attorney General. Ex... On June 23, 2008, John Roth, Senior Associate Deputy Attorney General wrote to Messrs. Lefkowitz and Stair, advising them that "federal prosecution of this case is appropriate." Ex. I. Mr. Roth also told Epstein's attorneys that their allegation

ust be denied, and the Government is instead entitled to summary judgment on that claim. A. The CVRA Did Not Create a Right to Notice of Epstein's State Court Proceedings Although petitioners contend that they had a statutory right to notice of the June 30, 2008 state court proceeding in which Epstein pled guilty to

I (a)(5) is significant 3 Jane Doe No. 2's exculpatory statements regarding Epstein were not lost on his attorneys. A December 21, 2007 letter from Jay Leflcowitz, one of Epstein's attorneys, to U.S. Attorney Acosta, devoted two pages examining Jane Doe No. 2's interview testimony on April 24, 2007. Ex. D at

hts associated with the agreement entered into by the United States and Mr. Epstein in a timely fashion." Ex. N, Nov. 27, 2007 email from Sloman to Lefkowitz. Epstein's attorneys responded by citing to the Attorney General's Guidelines provision stating that there must be a charge filed in a Federal distr

ust be denied, and the Government is instead entitled to summary judgment on that claim. A. The CVRA Did Not Create a Right to Notice of Epstein's State Court Proceedings Although petitioners contend that they had a statutory right to notice of the June 30, 2008 state court proceeding in which Epstein pled guilty to

71(a)(5) is significant 3 Jane Doe No. 2's exculpatory statements regarding Epstein were not lost on his attorneys. A December 21, 2007 letter from Jay Lefkowitz, one of Epstein's attorneys, to U.S. Attorney Acosta, devoted two pages examining Jane Doe No. 2's interview testimony on April 24, 2007. Ex. D at

hts associated with the agreement entered into by the United States and Mr. Epstein in a timely fashion." Ex. N, Nov. 27, 2007 email from Sloman to Lefkowitz. Epstein's attorneys responded by citing to the Attorney General's Guidelines provision stating that there must be a charge filed in a Federal distr

ust be denied, and the Government is instead entitled to summary judgment on that claim. A. The CVRA Did Not Create a Right to Notice of Epstein's State Court Proceedings Although petitioners contend that they had a statutory right to notice of the June 30, 2008 state court proceeding in which Epstein pled guilty to