Epstein Secrets

the authority, and his consent, to make any determination it deems appropriate regarding this matter, including to decline federal prosecution. 2 Jay Lefkowitz has personally reviewed the reporter's contemporaneous notes. EFTA00310840 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Honorable ■ May 14, 2008 Page 4 As you know, I

ncluding to decline federal prosecution. 2 Jay Lefkowitz has personally reviewed the reporter's contempora

sterday. 'write to you now to supplement our discussion. As you know, I feel strongly that the involvement of the federal government—culminating in the Deferred Prosecution Agreement—runs afoul of fundamental principles of federalism, the well-established Petite Policy, and issues of paramount importance with respect to the admi

olding adjudication or sentencing, and probation or community control in lieu of imprisonment." I have more than a dozen e-mails between myself and Jay Lefkowitz discussing the U.S. Attorney's insistence on eighteen months of incarceration. You will recall that at one meeting you and Ms. Sanchez raised the id

ust 26, 2008 DELIVERY BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Jay P. Lefkowitz, Esq. Kirkland & Ellis LLP Citigroup Center 15

Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Marie: Fauzintikt: I write in response to your letter dated August 15. 2008 regarding the civil restitution portion of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement (the "Agreement"). Thank you for confirming our position that the December modification proposal is not part of the Agreement. As expressed by U.S.

vd, Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Jay and Roy: Thank you for your response to my earlier e-mail. Our communications with Mr. Black and later with Mr. Lefkowitz were solely'to determine what Mr. Epstein considered to be the terms of the Non-Prosecution Agreement. We appreciate your answering our question wi

008 Re: deity Epstein nestrtolu: ) 4A13.4900 I write in response to your letter dated August 15. 2008 regarding the civil restitution portion of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement (the "Agreement"). Thank you for tumlIrmIng our position that ember modification proposal is not port of the Agreement. As expressed by U.S. Attor

September 17, 2007 email from M. Villafana to J. Lefkowitz attaching draft Deferred Prosecution Agreement, E

fallen into this manifest legal error.22 In addition, federal prosecutors insisted that they dictate every detail of the State sentence pursuant to the Deferred Prosecution Agreement. Once again, this was done without any coordination with the State. Federal prosecutors went so far as to demand a restriction on the judge not to