Epstein Secrets

cedures. I don't remember saying anything different in this case. I did not see any FBI letters in this case prior to collecting the FBI letters to Brad Edwards' clients in connection with the Jane Doe I United States litigation. I did not instruct the FBI to include the language about the case being under in

y Circuit Court (Exhibit B-41). I responded, acknowledging his representation (Exhibit B-42). On June 18, 2008, I liv received a call from attorney Brad ards, who told me that he represented Individual #43, who is also Jane Doe #1 in the Jane Doe United States lawsuit. Mr. Edwards expressed an interest

a call from attorney Brad ards, who told me that he represented Individual #43, who is also Jane Doe #1 in the Jane Doe United States lawsuit. Mr. Edwards expressed an interest in assisting with the case. We were still waiting to hear about whether we would be moving " On the State side, Lefkowitz has

stein's team was equally successful in DC, where they dictated who could and could not participate in the "independent review" at CEOS. For example, Myesha Braden, who had not yet joined the Leap Year team, was excluded from consideration because she had disagreed with Lilly Ann Sanchez about the handling of

SERVICE LIST Jane Does 1 and 21 United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/MAITHEWMAN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Brad Edwards, Esq., Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman 425 N Andrews Ave Ste 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-3268 [email protected] 954-524-2820

istrict Court, Southern District of Florida Brad Edwards, Esq., Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehr

pre-indictment consultation contract Work Product 6(e) Investigative Privilege P-013977 thru P-013979 5/21/2007 email from Marie Villafafia to Myesha Braden (CEOS) re 2423(b) charging question Work Product 6(e) Deliberative Process Investigative Privilege P-013980 5/21/2007 email from Marie Villafa

already entered a binding non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein. The government is without 6 EFTA00191204 knowledge of precisely when "Bradley J. Edwards was working on a letter to the U.S. Attorney's Office concerning the need to federally prosecute Epstein for sex offenses committed against Jane Do

rally prosecute Epstein for sex offenses committed against Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2," and, accordingly, the government denies the assertion that Edwards worked on that letter on July 3, 2008. Except as otherwise admitted above, the government denies Request No. 12. 13. (a) The government admits that

ps taken to obtain DOJ authorization Work Product 6(e) Deliberative Process Investigative Privilege 2 5/21/2007 email from Marie Villafafta to Myesha Braden (CEOS) re 2423(b) charging question Work Product 6(e) Deliberative Process Investigative Privilege 3 5/21/2007 email from Marie Villafafia to

ERVICE LIST Jane Does 1 and 2 v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/MATTHEWMAN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Brad Edwards, Esq., Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman 425 N Andrews Ave Ste 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-3268 [email protected] 954-524-2820

istrict Court, Southern District of Florida Brad Edwards, Esq., Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehr

pre-indictment consultation contract Work Product 6(e) Investigative Privilege P-013977 thru P-013979 5/21/2007 email from Marie Villafana to Myesha Braden (CEOS) re 2423(b) charging question Work Product 6(e) Deliberative Process Investigative Privilege P-013980 5/21/2007 email from Marie Villafa

ERVICE LIST Jane Does 1 and 2 v. United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/MATTHEWMAN United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Brad Edwards, Esq., Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehrman 425 N Andrews Ave Ste 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-3268 [email protected] 954-524-2820

istrict Court, Southern District of Florida Brad Edwards, Esq., Farmer Jaffe Weissing Edwards Fistos Lehr

pre-indictment consultation contract Work Product 6(e) Investigative Privilege P-013977 thru P-013979 5/21/2007 email from Marie Villafana to Myesha Braden (CEOS) re 2423(b) charging question Work Product 6(e) Deliberative Process Investigative Privilege P-013980 5/21/2007 email from Marie Villafa

ent's charges, this Court assured both adequate notice of the allegations against the defendants and ample opportunity for a meaningful de- fense. Edwards, 430 A.2d at 1339-41. 4. Even in full-blown criminal trials, the Sixth Amendments Confrontation Clause poses the only constitutional objection to

Division Rolando Garcia, Deputy Chief, Criminal Division Karen Atkinson, Chief, Northern Region From: cc: A. Marie Villafafia Drew Oosterbaan Myesha Braden INTRODUCTION This third supplement summarizes the changes to the indictment and prosecution memo since the first presentation in May 2007. The mos