Epstein Secrets

Y ELECTRONIC MAIL Christian Everdell, Esq. Mark Cohen, Esq. Cohen & Gresser LLP 800 Third Avenue New

sional Responsibility ("OPR") regarding the resolution of the 2006-2008 criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "OPR Report"). Although the OPR Report is publicly available and accessible through multiple websites, the Government has elected to produce a

the conduct escalated to full sexual intercourse. As part of the resolution of the case, Epstein has agreed that he would not contest jurisdiction in the Southern District of Florida for any victim who chose to sue him for damages pursuant to 18 USC 2255. Mr. Epstein agreed to provide an attorney for victims who elected to proceed

served Maxwell for deposition in 2009. See Deposition Notice attached as Exhibit “BB.” Maxwell was represented by Brett Jaffe of the New York firm of Cohen and Gresser, and Edwards understood that her attorney was paid for (directly or indirectly) by Epstein. She was reluctant to give her deposition, and

Epstein took voluntary dismissal of his claims because he knew he did not have probable cause or an evidentiary basis to support the allegations. See Cohen v. Corwin, 980 So. 2d 1153 at 1156 (citing Union Oil of California, Amsco Division v. Watson, 468 So. 2d 349 at 354 (stating that “where a dismissal

e 12 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013330 --- PAGE BREAK --- discussions, on September 24, 2007, Epstein signed an agreement with the U.S. Attomney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida. Under the agreement, Epstein agreed to plead guilty to an indictment pending against him in the 15" Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County ch

Y ELECTRONIC MAIL Christian Everdell, Esq. Mark Cohen, Esq. Cohen & Gresser LLP Laura Menninger, Esq.

on, the Government is producing these records to you in the form in which they were stored in the files maintained by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida. The Government recognizes that its discovery obligations are ongoing and will promptly produce any additional discoverable material of which it be

at *3 (D. Or. Aug. 3, 2015); United States v. Young, Nos. 12 Cr. 502, 12 Cr. 645, 2013 WL 12131300, at *7 (D. Utah Aug. 27, 2013); United States v. Cohen, No. C 10-00547, 2010 WL 5387757, at *9 n.11 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2010); United States v. Bohn, 330 F. Supp. 2d 960, 961 (W.D. Tenn. 2004); United S

ether in Florida or elsewhere). The final substantive paragraph of the NPA states that "Epstein hereby requests that the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida defer [...] prosecution." It is well settled in the Second Circuit that "a plea agreement in one U.S. Attorney's office does not, unless otherwise

-9 ("a number of districts outside the Southern District of Florida (e.g., the Southern District of New York ...) share jurisdiction and venue with the Southern District of Florida over potential federal criminal charges based on the alleged sexual acts committed by Epstein against [Jane Doe 1 and 2]. Epstein is thus subject t

or enforcement of congressionally created rights, the courts must give "appropriate judicial deference toward the will of Congress ...."Hardison v. Cohen, 375 F.3d 1262, 1264 (11th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation omitted). Congress is "in a better position to decide whether or not the public interest w

till potentially be pursued in other districts, such as the Southern District of New York . . .."); DE 205-2 at 8-9 ("a number of districts outside the Southern District of Florida (e.g., the Southern District of New York ...) share jurisdiction and venue with the Southern District of Florida over potential federal criminal ch

or enforcement of congressionally created rights, the courts must give "appropriate judicial deference toward the will of Congress ...."Hardison v. Cohen, 375 F.3d 1262, 1264 (11th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation omitted). Congress is "in a better position to decide whether or not the public interest w