Epstein Secrets

ed Epstein EFTA01718422 12/11/2007 11:37 FAX 002/099 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Kenya W. Shan I o Call Wrier AS ": I lonorabic R. Alexander Acosta United Stales Attorney United States Attorney's Orrice Southern District of Florida , 33132 Re! Jeffrey F.pstein Ikar Alce: L,,,Ngwub. ONJp,nPa007 ww....at

Cocoa,, 74- 6h,e_ FC33 (13 I Date of Bitfh is„ 20) 1453 Place of Binh M t.) kfr-k • : f declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United Slates of America that the foregoing hs true and COTTOCI. and that I am the pe n named ahoive, ind I understand that any falsification of this statement is punishabl

ontES441/07 • sm.% EFTA01718412 Embassy of the United States of America Office of the Legal Attaché US Consulate File No. ActingCoordinator Americas, Europe, Middle East & Africa Desk Australian Federal Police Canberra, ACT Australia 03 December 2008 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Mr. The United S

person can be charged with a criminal 39 EFTA01718477 offense, that is a violation of Florida Statutes Section 794.05; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2422(b) and 2. COUNT 14 (Enticement of a Minor: 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b)) 49. Paragraphs 1 through 19 of this Indictment are re-alleged

eady tleierntined that our 7:tilothinet..t: arson:ems regualing why a federal proseeuti In t . !Vs. Itpsotin is not oar:anted wen: "compc•Ilin;.- I Inwever. in contr.:diction to Mr assertion that CEOS had proviths,1 an indent:lid:Mt. de Punt roele.. •. CFOS made clear t.tal tt t. i ma. do ND. indeed.,

ugh such misconduct was, as we contend it is, inextricably intertwined with the credibility of the accusations being made against Mr. Epstein by the United States Attorney's Office in Miami ("USAO"). Moreover, CEOS did not assess the terms of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement now in effect, nor did CEOS revie

ON-1 has already determined dim our sultstanube arguments regarding why a federal prosecution of Mr. h.pinein is not nu:timed were "compelling.- I Inwever. in euniradielion In Mr. Sloman's assertion that CliQS had provided an independent. de unto review. CMS; made clear that it did nol. du sit. indeed.

ough such misconduct was, as we contend it is, inextricably intenwined with the credibility of the accusations being made against Mr. Epstein by the United States Attorney's Office in Miami ("USAO"). Moreover, CEOS did not assess the terms of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement now in effect, nor did CEOS revie

) has already determined that our Substantive arguments regarding why a federal prosecution of Mr. 149nein is not unrranied were - compelling.- I Inwever. in contradiction to Mr. Sloinairs acsenion that CLOS had provided an independent. dr ;uwn review. CFOS made clear that it did not tin so. indeed. r