Epstein Secrets

y, and, at a minimum, provided the victims with Belohlavek’s contact information. Acosta could have interacted with the State Attorney, or instructed Villafana or others to do so, to ensure the state intended to make notifications in a way that reached the most possible victims and that it had the informatio

ons leading to the agreement: former U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, and former AUSAs Jeffrey H. Sloman, Matthew I. Menchel, Andrew C. Lourie, and Ann Marie C. Villafana. Each subject submitted written responses detailing their involvement in the federal investigation of Epstein, the drafting and execution of the NPA,

is,~ on~ ~roscclilion_.Agrccmcnt and agrees to somrly. with. thcrp. By; CA/ Aronberg-000777 R:. AtEXANDERACOSTA UNITED s:r'.iTESATI◊R.NEY • A. :MARIE VILLAFANA AssfsTANT fos .• ATTQ~N-tY ·OERALi;:>.L13FCbUJ{t;:ESQ: C0VNSELTQ JEFFREY EJJ,SJEJN LiLLY ANN'SANCIJ~Z; isQ'. NFTORNEY FQR J½FFREY EPSTEIN FILED

.that he understands the clarifications to the Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY A. MARIE VILLAFASA ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY Dated: JEFFREY EPSTEIN GERALD LEFCOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN Dated: LILLY ANN'SANCHEZ, BS' ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EP

prosecutors, such consultations may be limited to gathering information from victims and conveying only nonsensitive data and public information.”443 Villafaha’s concern about generating potential impeachment evidence by informing victims of their potential to recover monetary damages from Epstein was not un

as evidence. See Fed! R. Crim. P. 11(f) (“The admissibility or inadmissibility of a plea, a plea discussion, and any related statement is governed by Federal Rule of Evidence 410.”). In any case, the victims could have been impeached regarding the possibility' of their obtaining monetary damages through either a ci

sked whether she was concerned that failing to tell victims about the NPA when she was interviewing them would mislead victims, as previously noted, Villafaña told OPR that she believed she and the agents were conducting an investigation because they continued “interviewing witnesses” and “doing all these

Black, Esq. Counsel to Jeffrey Epstein R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: ___________ ____________________________________ By: A. Marie Villafaña Assistant United States Attorney (;+,%,7  6HSWHPEHU   1RQဨ3URVHFXWLRQ $JUHHPHQW [Page Intentionally Left Blank] INRE: INVESTIGATION

osecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. Dated: ----- DatedM Dated: ----- Dated: ----- By: R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY A. MARIE VILLAFANA ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY GERALD LEFCOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN LILLY ANN SANCHEZ, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN Page 7 of 7 By

evidence. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(f) (“The admissibility or inadmissibility of a plea, a plea discussion, and any related statement is governed by Federal Rule of Evidence 410.”). In any case, the victims could have been impeached regarding the possibility of their obtaining monetary damages through either a c

Page 1 of 56 Westlaw Delivery Summary Report for VILLAFANA,MARIE 3563006 Date/Time of Request: Wednesday,

See United States Soto-Beniquez, 356 F.3d I, 52 (1st Cir.2004) ("Any possible prejudice to [defendant] from the government's non-compliance [with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32] was cured by the district court's two-week continuance to give defense counsel an ad- equate opportunity to respondlo the gove