Epstein Secrets

such targeting occurred. EFTA00176487 la OFFICES OF GERALD B. ISEICOURT, P.G. Jeffrey Sloman, Esq. Matthew Menchel, Esq. Andrew Lourie, Esq. A. Marie Villafafia, Esq. Office of the United States Attorney Southern District of Florida June 25, 2007 Page 3 unlikely to be sanctioned by the courts.' To stretc

tthew Menchel, Esq. Andrew Louie, Esq. A. Marie Villafana, Esq. Office of the United States Attorney Sout

q. Matthew Menchel, Esq. Andrew Louie, Esq. A. Marie Villafana, Esq. Office of the United States Attorney Sout

Page 4 proceeds of specified unlawful activity,' orAc) `to avoid a transaction reporting requirement under State or Federal law". United States'. Puche, 350 F.3d 1137 (11th Cir. 2003);5 see also United States" Arditti, 955 F.2d 331 (5th Cir.), reh'g denied, cert denied 506 U.S. 998 (1992), cert. de

United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 99 NE 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 Andrew Lourie, Deputy Chief, Northern Region A. Marie Villafatla, Assistant United States Attorney The United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Pa

rida 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Re: Jeffrey E. Epstein Dear Messrs. Sloman, Menchel and Lourie and Ms. Villafana: LLLLL .R3Nt .2o2I 7370400 FACSIMILE 221/066102 As you are aware, we represent Jeffrey E. Epstein in connection with your ongoing investigation

Int:our, P.G I proceeds of specified unlawful activity,' or ) 'to avoid araction reporting requirement under State orf ederal law"'. United States Puche, 350 3d 1137 (11" Cir. 2003);' see also United States I Arditti, 955'.2d 331 (5° Cir.), reh'g denied cert. denied 506 U.S. 998 (1992), cert. denie

ase at the Earliest Stage 4, In early November of 2006, Epstein’s lawyers had their initial contact with the newly assigned line federal prosecutor, A. Marie Villafana. Although it is extremely unusual for a First Assistant United States Attorney to participate in such a communication, FAUSA Jeffrey Sloman was prese

proval because her subpoena was not directed to “an office physically located within an attorney’s office.” See Tab 18, December 13, 2007 Letter from M. Villafana at 4n.1. This answer clearly suggests that Ms. Villafana had intentionally misled the Department officials about the items that her subpoena sought.”

tion in favor of the state. Although Mr. Epstein and the State Attorney’s Office had already reached a plea agreement, in August 2007, Mr. Sloman and AUSA Marie Villafana warned that they intended to prosecute Epstein federally unless his counsel (i.e., not the U.S. Attorney’s Office) sought more stringent conditions t