Epstein Secrets

P-003634 Thru P-003646 File folder bearing victim name containing FBI interview report from May 2008, telephone activity report with attorney (Villafanafia) handwritten notes, related grand jury material Work product Attorney-client privilege 6(e) Investigative privilege Also contains information

08/16/2013 Page 30 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #2 P409114 Tint P-009115 7/3/2008 Email from A. Marie Villafafia to Col. M. Gauger at PBSO re Epstein work release with attachment [not being withheld as privileged — produced to opposing counsel] N/A Box

Underpinnings; Fiduciary Duty; Court Compelled Disclosure; Factual Materials; Waiver Box #3 P-013231 Thai P-013239 April 22, 2008 Letter from A. Marie Villafafia to Office of Professional Responsibility re Self-Report of Allegation of Conflict of Interest Privacy Act Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinni

aiver; Claims Against Public Prosecutor, Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Epstein, with e- mail from Menchel (July 5, 2007, 3:30 p.m.), Villafana to Menchel (July 4, 2007, 5:16 p.m.), and Sloman to Villafana (July 3, 2007, 1:47 p.m.), attached Suppl. Box 3 P-013866 E-mail, Marie Villafana

e victims were not properly notified about event during that investigation. 59. RFP No. 25 requests all initial productions that are required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This is a protective request to ensure that, should it be determined that the Civil Rules apply, they then receive all materials to whic

attorneys. Supplemental Declaration of A. Marie Villafana, Dec. 22, 2008, doe. #35 at 2-3. 49. On July 11,

ein's attorneys. Supplemental Declaration of A. Marie Villafana, Dec. 22, 2008, doe. #35 at 2-3. 49. On July 11,

tter for some time. Indeed, the Government sent notice to Petitioner more than a year ago that 'your case is under investigation?' See Letter from A. Marie Villafatia to C.W. at 2 (June 7, 2007) (attached to Governmen'.'s Response) (emphasis added). The notice went on to tell Petitioner that "as a victim and/or w

we are also writing to ask for your non-opposition to Jane Doe No. 3 and Jane Doe No. 4's motion to intervene in the case. As you know, Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows intervention on two grounds: Mandatory intervention is allowed where a putative intervenor "claims an inter relating to the . . .

ental box No. 3 (P-013504 to P-013507). The entry here reads: "File folder labeled `Mtg w/ Ken Starr, RAA, JS, Drew' containing handwritten notes by A. Marie Villafaiia." Kenn Staff, of course, is a defense attorney who represented defendant Epstein. Recording information provided by a defense attorney is not part o

mails) that were sent to. conied to, or sent by Reinhart in which the word "Epstein," _ ' "Morrison," "Visoki," "Rogers," "Hammond," Roxburgh," "Villafana, " "Florida Science Foundation," "Starr," "Black," "Goldberger," "Jeffrey," "Australian," "Lewis," "Sanchez," "358 El Brillo Way" appears and which

prosecutors working on the case (including, but not limited to, federal prosecutors 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 a

e victims were not properly notified about event during that investigation. 59. RFP No. 25 requests all initial productions that are required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This is a protective request to ensure that, should it be determined that the Civil Rules apply, they then receive all materials to whic

n agreement. At this point it is clear that AUSA Villafana was restricted in what she was being permitted to

/07 letters from A. Acosta to K. Starr and from J. Sloman to J. Lefkowitz re performance and victim notification with handwritten notes and edits by A. Marie Villafafla." Again, these materials are central to the dispute in this case, as they involve discussions between the U.S. Attorney's Office and defense attorne

prosecutors working on the case (including, but not limited to, federal prosecutors 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 a

ell). Id. The Court then noted: "Because the Court will allow this limited factual development, it is unnecessary to decide here whether the CVRA or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide discovery rights in this context. The Court therefore reserves ruling on [the victims'] motion [for an order directing the Govern

/2011 Page 10 of 10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The foregoing document was served on March 21, 2011. on the following using the Court's CM/ECF system: A. Marie Villafafia Assistant U.S. Attorney 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 Fax: (561) 820-8777 E-mail: ann.marie.c.lill

ave placed victims of Epstein's sexual abuse in "the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial." Declaration of Marie Villafana, July 9, 2008 (doc. #14) at 3-4. The affidavit also goes on to say that "these provisions were discussed," id. at 4, apparently referring to this

e of the unfounded allegations made against AUSA Villafana by Epstcin's counsel during the "higher level re

rs. III. PETITIONERS HAVE NO RIGHT TO DISCOVERY UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Petitioners argue they arc entitled to discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but they point to no particular rule, or case, which provides that such a discovery rights exists. Instead, petitioners seize upon the g

Negotiations" containing 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Villafana to J. N. it status update; undated and typed ha

f this Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: By: Dated: 77a, Dated: Dated: VILLAFARA ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY GERALD LEFCOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN LILLY ANN SANCHEZ, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN Page 7 of 7 EFTA

o supplemental box No. 3 (P-013644 through P-013653). The entry here "File folder e ' I "Notes Re Plea Negotiations" containing 9/17/07 e-mail from A. Villafana to J. N. it status update; undated and typed handwritten notes by A. Villafafia re items to be completed on case, strength of case, victim interv

e victims were not properly notified about event during that investigation. 59. RFP No. 25 requests all initial productions that are required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This is a protective request to ensure that, should it be determined that the Civil Rules apply, they then receive all materials to whic

/2011 Page 10 of 10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The foregoing document was served on March 21, 2011, on the following using the Court's CM/ECF system: A. Marie Villafafla Assistant U.S. Attorney 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 Fax: (561) 820-8777 E mail: ann.marie.c.vill

office file a corrected declaration and accompanying explanation. The first statement is found at page 3 to 4 of the July 9th, 2008 declaration of Marie Villafafia. There a provision in a plea agreement with Mr. Jeffrey Epstein is recounted. As we understand the Government's current position in this case, it is

n been convicted at trial." Declaration of Marie Villafana, July 9, 2008 (doe. #14) at 3-4. The affidavit

itioners. PETITIONERS HAVE NO RIGHT TO DISCOVERY UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Petitioners argue they arc entitled to discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but they point to no particular rule, or case, which provides that such a discovery rights exists. Instead, petitioners seize upon the g

nited States of America, Respondent: Ann Marie C. Villafana, LEAD ATTORNEY, United States Attorney's Office,

ay C. Howell, PRO HAC VICE, Jay Howell & Associates PA, Jacksonville, FL; Paul G. Cassell, PRO HAC VICE. For United States of America, Respondent: Ann Marie C. Villafana, LEAD ATTORNEY, United States Attorney's Office, West Palm Beach. FL; Dexter Lee, LEAD ATTORNEY, United States Attorney's Office, Miami, FL. For R

76 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87203, * already served their Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures (DE 266 at 13), and although this Court has repeatedly held that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure "govern the general course of this proceeding," the Government maintains that the rule governing initial disclosures in civil litigation

13) (citing Declaration of Asst. U.S. 5 EFTA00230177 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 51 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/21/2011 Page 6 of 10 Attorney Marie Villafafia). These same subjects were also discussed at length at the Court's July 11, 2008, hearing on the matter. See, e.g., Tr. July 11, 2008, at 3-4, 18-1

n been convicted at trial." Declaration of Marie Villafana, July 9, 2008 (doe. #14) at 3-4. The affidavit

itioners. PETITIONERS HAVE NO RIGHT TO DISCOVERY UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Petitioners argue they arc entitled to discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but they point to no particular rule, or case, which provides that such a discovery rights exists. Instead, petitioners seize upon the g

41. The journalist printed an article using some of the information I told her. Shortly after the article was published, I talked on the phone to Marie Villafafta, a federal prosecutor from Florida. I had seen her name on the official letter from the FBI, so she seemed legitimate. Villafafta seemed very inter

orcement proceeding because it is not a "civil action" against the Government. To be sure, this Court has determined that convenience dictates that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure "govern the general course of this proceeding." See DE 257 at 3. But that procedural determination does not alter the substance of this ca