Epstein Secrets

e 9:08-cv-80736-KAM •ument 416-1 Entered on FLSD Dirt 08/11/2017 Page 10 of LA141)FFICE I • (Aetti( tre/reildi • ; AND ASSOCIATES July 3, 2008 Ann Marie C. Villafana, AUSA United States Attorney's Office 500 South Australian Avenue West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Dear Ms. Villafana: VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN

S July 3, 2008 Ann Marie C. Villafana, AUSA United States Attorney's Office 500 South Australian Avenue West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Dear Ms. Villafana: VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 7007 2680 0002 5519 8503 As you are aware, we represent several of the young girls that were victimi

both this CVRA action and the related civil suits. There is no concealment or unfairness that are the hallmarks for applying judicial estoppel. Cf. Burnes v. Pemco Aeroplex, Inc., 291 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2002) (applying doctrine in circumstances showing deliberate concealment of assets). The Supreme Court has clearly held "

puty Chief, Northern Region), and AUSA Anna Marie Villafana. Mr. Epstein retained counsel with expertise in

Jeffrey Sloman (First Assistant U.S. Attorney), Matthew Menchel (Chief, Criminal Division), Andrew Lourie (Deputy Chief, Northern Region), and AUSA Anna Marie Villafana. Mr. Epstein retained counsel with expertise in federal law and federal jurisdiction, including a former federal appellate judge, a former United S

el precludes a party from "asserting a claim in a legal proceeding that is inconsistent with a claim taken by that party in a previous proceeding." Burnes v. Pemco Aeroplex, Inc., 291 F.3d 1282, 1285 (11th Cir. 2002), overruled in part, Slater v. United States Steel Corp., 871 F.3d 1174, 1176-77 (11th Cir. 2017). It is "an e

e Assistant United States Attorney Fla Bar No. 0936693 99 N.E. 4'h Street, Suite 300 Miami, Florida 33132 Tel: E mail: [email protected] /s/A. Marie Villafafia A. Marie Villafaila Assistant United States Attorney Fla Bar No. 0018255 500 S. Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Tel: E

ken by that party in a previous proceeding.' Judicial estoppel is an equitable concept intended to prevent the perversion of the judicial process." Burnes v. Pemco Aeroplex, Inc. 291 F.3d 1282, 1285 (11th Cir. 2002) (citation omitted). Judicial estoppel prohibits "parties from deliberately changing positions according to the