Epstein Secrets

tivity for which a person can be charged with a criminal offense, that is a violation of Florida Statutes Section 794.05; in violation of Title 18, United StateW bode, Sections 2422(b) and 2. COUNT 22 (Enticement of a Minor: 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b)) 55. Paragraphs 1 through 25 of this Indictment are re-alleged

rtment could bring charges, it should decline as a matter of prosecutorial discretion. The relevant factors are set forth in Section 9-27.230 of the United States Attorney's Manual, and those factors counsel against prosecution. Mr. Epstein has no criminal history of any kind. Given the unique nature of any pr

il litigation against him. They further demanded that Mr. Epstein waive EFTA00225865 • Page 44 case involving the murder of a federal official." U.S.A.M. § 9-2.031D. To put it mildly, that egregious example is a far cry from the situation at hand. Instead, the federal prosecutors' disagreement with t

to undertake discussion with the State Attorney's Office to ensure compliance with these procedures, which compliance will be necessary to satisfy the United States' interest pursuant to the Petite Policy." Id. However, after Mr. Epstein's counsel conveyed to the prosecutors the fact that they had appeared to ig

While federal prosecutors once suggested that Mr. Epstein's retention of Jack Goldberger was intended to trigger the recusal of assistant prosecutor Dahlia Weiss and thereby influence the outcome of the State prosecution, that assertion is frivolous. Mr. Goldberger was retained by Gerald Lefcourt after Mr. Ep

port of its motion to stay. DE 140. In that reply, the Government represented that it would voluntarily be providing information to the victims: "[Tjhe United States has agreed to provide some information to [the victims] even during the pendency of the stay and is undertaking a search for that information." DE

ernment which may be favorable to the defendant on the issues of guilty or punishment within the scope of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976)." The Court should adopt that language to the case at hand here. Interesting, the Standing Discovery Order — and asso

osecutors Alexander Acosta, Jeffrey H. Sloman, Matt Menchel, Andy Lourie, Ann Marie Villafana, Dexter Lee, and Bruce Reinhart and state prosecutors Dahlia Weiss, Lana Belolovek, and others involved in the Epstein investigation) and defense attorneys representing Epstein (including, but not limited to, Roy B

port of its motion to stay. DE 140. In that reply, the Government represented that it would voluntarily be providing information to the victims: "[T]he United States has agreed to provide some information to [the victims] even during the pendency of the stay and is undertaking a search for that information." DE

ers, and correspondence of any type between government prosecutors w rkin n h a: in I in b t n limi f r I Al x r A . and state prosecutors Dahlia Weiss, Lana Belolovek, and others involved in the Epstein investigation) and defense attorneys representing Epstein (including, but not limited to, Roy B

port of its motion to stay. DE 140. In that reply, the Government represented that it would voluntarily be providing information to the victims: "[T]he United States has agreed to provide some information to [the victims] even during the pendency of the stay and is undertaking a search for that information." DE

osecutors Alexander Acosta, Jeffrey H. Sloman, Matt Menchel, Andy Lourie, Ann Marie Villafana, Dexter Lee, and Bruce Reinhart and state prosecutors Dahlia Weiss, Lana Belolovek, and others involved in the Epstein investigation) and defense attorneys representing Epstein (including, but not limited to, Roy B