Epstein Secrets

tion to the New York Times 44. Perhaps most troubling of all, the USAO has repeatedly leaked information about this case to the media—including to Landon Thomas, the senior business correspondent for the New York Thnes. We have personally reviewed Mr. Thomas's own notes, and they are remarkably detailed abo

about this case to the media—including to Landon Thomas, the senior business correspondent for the New York Thnes. We have personally reviewed Mr. Thomas's own notes, and they are remarkably detailed about highly confidential aspects of the prosecution's theory of the case and the plea negotiations.

re. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States I Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base to minors, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and 859(a)

ral prosecutors have pursued under the federal sta tes at issue here. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States I Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base

EFTA00157660 LAW OFFICES ALLEN GUTHRIN: MCHUGH & THOMAS, PLLC GEORGE 43.GUIRRE ROSERT e. PALEN RFJXCCA A. SETTS R. IERRAKE ROCOERS CANSO IS THOMAS ONES S. ARNO° DAVOS HARDY Mt SCOTT WCKLINE PANELS I. CANINO PAMELA C. CON PINUP .S STEPKOIETTHACKER DREAMT J. ANN TERESA K. INOWSON DEBRA

tion to the New York Times 44. Perhaps most troubling of all, the USAO has repeatedly leaked information about this case to the media—including to Landon Thomas, the senior business correspondent for the New York Times. We have personally reviewed Mr. Thomas's own notes, and they are remarkably detailed abo

e. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United Stares v. Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein's case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base to minors, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and 859(a)

ion of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1); and sex trafficking of children in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371 and 1591. United States v. Boehm, Case No. 3:04CR00003 (D. Alaska 2004). Boehm's actions, unlike Mr. Epstein's, also had a strong interstate nexus: Boehm purchased and distributed

carefully considering your request, I have decided, in my capacity as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney, not to make an exception here. Regarding the Landon Thomas matter, Mr. Thomas was given, pursuant to his request, non-case specific information concerning specific federal statutes. Regarding the offer to

quest, I have decided, in my capacity as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney, not to make an exception here. Regarding the Landon Thomas matter, Mr. Thomas was given, pursuant to his request, non-case specific information concerning specific federal statutes. Regarding the offer to extend the current

est in maintaining their privacy: (6) Experience litigating in federal court in the Southern District of Florida; ' Your letter refaitinces U.S. v Boehm, No. 3:04CR00003 (D. Ala 2004) as a model for a restitution fund sealement I asked ow prosecutor to contact the AOSA in that ease. In that matter, t

carefully considering your request, I have decided, in my capacity as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney, not to make an exception here. Regarding the Landon Thomas matter, Mr. Thomas was given, pursuant to his request, non-case specific information concerning specific federal statutes. Regarding the offer to

quest, I have decided, in my capacity as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney, not to make an exception here. Regarding the Landon Thomas matter, Mr. Thomas was given, pursuant to his request, non-case specific information concerning specific federal statutes. Regarding the offer to extend the current

er handler! between It. apatdit and the victims' representatives, and that this Office should not act as intermediary. Finally, I would note that in Boehm is well, the victims' identities were net Initially disclosed. At the AUSA wrote In dint cam "This filing is made cx ante because Boehm in hit plea

arefully considering your request, I have decided, in my capacity as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney, not to make an exception here. Regarding the Landon Thomas matter, Mr. Thomas was given, pursuant to his request, non-case specific information concerning specific federal statutes. Regarding the offer to ex

request, I have decided, in my capacity as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney, not to make an exception here. Regarding the Landon Thomas matter, Mr. Thomas was given, pursuant to his request, non-case specific information concerning specific federal statutes. Regarding the offer to extend the current de

impartial, independent representative be. appointed to administer that fund. Notably, such a restitution fund was created in a federal case, U.S. v. Boehm, Case No. 3:04CR00003 (D. Alaska 2004). The federal prosecutors here rejected this idea, and they insisted that an attorney representative, paid for

ral prosecutors have pursued under the federal statutes at issue here. When asked, the closest case suggested by the prosecutors was United States v. Boehm—and it hardly could differ more from Mr. Epstein’s case. In Boehm, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base t

rmation about this case to the media—including to Landon Thomas, the senior business correspondent for the New Yor