Epstein Secrets

nduct of any particular professional, we cannot 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

he grand jury issued subpoenas to the records-custodian and employees of Epstein's businesses for all financial transactions from 2003 forward, Ms. Villafana (who we were told was not authorized to act in this regard without supervisory approval) promised to close the money-laundering investigation "if th

hing the relevant federal statutes beyond recognition, and that federal involvement in this mutter should be precluded butt on federalism concerns, the Petite Policy, and general principles of prosecutorial disattion, the panics corn • discussions of a possible plea agreement. Around this time, we received an e

tors also acknowledged the application of the Petite Policy in drafts of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement. See e.g., September 17, 2007 email from M. Villafana to J. Leflcowitz attaching draft Deferred Prosecution Agreement, Exhibit 32. 17 While federal prosecutors once suggested that Mr. Epstein's retenti

Petite policy will be served by the following procedure [contained in the Deferred Prosecution Agreement)." See e.g., September 17, 2007 email from M. Villafana to J. Lefkowitz attaching draft Deferred Prosecution Agreement, Exhibit 32. The draft agreement further stated: "Epstein understands that it is hi

federal prosecutors were taking in order to circumvent its restrictions. Mr. Menchel's articulation of the purported federal interest misrepresents the Petite Policy on two grounds. First, Mr. Menchel's position that the federal interest could not be vindicated in the absence of a jail term for Mr. Epstein is co

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

ng the relevant federal statutes beyond recognition, and that federal involvement in this matter should he precluded basest on federalism concerns, the Petite Policy, and general principles of prosecutorial discretion. the parties commenced discussions of a possible plea agreement. Around this time. we received a

from you or your stalT(and sometimes from Ms. hermit) on a particular issue, only to subsequently receive a contradictory interpretation FM111 Ms. Villafana that negates our prior common understanding. I ler misinterpretations appear to be attempts to effectively change the spirit and the meaning of the

ing the relevant federal statutes beyond recognition, and that federal involvement in this matter should be precluded based on federalism concerns. the Petite Policy, and general principles or prosecutorial discretion. the parties commenced discussions an possible pica agreement. Around this time, we received an