Epstein Secrets

nduct of any particular professional, we cannel escape the conclusion that the cumulative effect of the conduct of Assistant United States Attorney Marie Villafana led your Office to take positions during the investigation and negotiation of this matter that has led to unprecedented federal overreaching. In fac

t was remotely similar to the federal investigation fix the prosecution of this matter. and that ease has since been distinguished as well. B. Mg. Villafana Prompted An Unduly Invasive linvestiantion Of Mr. Epstein. Ms. investigation of Mr. Epstein raises serious questions. Despite the. IS that she was

the Petite policy will be served by the Following procedure ... Epstein understands that the United Stales Attorney has no authority to require the Slate Attorney's Orrice to abide by any terms of this agreement. lipstein understands that it is his EFTA00176127 12/11/2007 11:42 FAX la019/099 KIRK

. By the way, Jeff and Alex have been very clear that we are not negotiating with this guy any more in any way. Thx. Bob Original Message From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 2:54 PM To: Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS); Senior, Robert (USAFLS) Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS) Subjec

more or less. Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 1594(b). A A TRUE BILL. FOREPERSON R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY A. MARIE VILLAFANA ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 54 EFTA00225730 (a) cannot be located upon the exercise of due diligence; has been transferred or sold to, or

ne without any ruspee4 an' (lie turmal rum:tip ll tt and scheduling of state judicial neuters. It require< den Mr. Ep stein's counsel persuade the Slate Attorney of l'alen peach tu issue a criminal in !brit union EFTA00225692 uoiuzive AWN 14:3a /AA 305 530 6440 EXECUTIVE OFFICE (moot U.S. Depart

PBPD brought the case to the FBI’s attention because of a concern that the State Attorney’s Office had succumbed to “pressure” from defense counsel. Villafana informed both Acosta and Sloman of this when she met with them at the start of the federal investigation. Acosta confirmed that he was aware that the

U.S. at 756-57; Pittman, 267 F.3d at 1283; Richmond Newspapers, 448 U.S. at 596 (“the 5 No-knock warrants have been banned in Florida since 1994. See Slate y. Bamber, 630 So.2d 1048 (Fla. 1994). 6 While it is largely federal courts that have applied these nine factors, (1) there can be no dispute that Fl

y attempted to nominate Bert Ocariz for attorney representative, despite the fact that Mr. Minix turns out to be a very good personal friend of Ms. Villalana's boyfriend, a fact she assiduously kept hidden from counsel. We requested alternate choices immediately, hut were told that Mr. Outwit had been in

request is fair and would not be unduly burdensome. II. THE IMPROPER IN VOI EM ENT AND CONDUCT OF FEDERAL AUTHORITIES. As established above, the Slate's charging decision. of one count of the solicitation of prostitution, was hardly irrational or irregular. Indeed, I ana Belohlavek. a Florida sex

quire registration. A. Honda Statute § 796.03 is Inapplicable It should be noted that at the time § 796.03 was negotiated between the panics. Ms. Villafana maintained (and continued to maintain as late as last week). that a § 796.03 charge involved the solicitation of a minor, not the procurement of a m

roposal we received From Ms. Villafana. that she has always seen solicitation of a minor as tx: appropriate charge under the facts Ilhis is also the Slate's recommended charge). What is now apparent is that she thought that solicitation of a minor MIS both a felony and a registerable charge under Flor