Epstein Secrets

of the agents and myself the matter was, in fact, "currently under investigation." The NPA was signed on September 24, 2007. The letters that Judge Marra referred to in his order were dated January 10, 2008 and May 30, 2008. During the period that the letters were sent, Epstein was asserting that: (I

as signed on September 24, 2007. The letters that Judge Marra referred to in his order were dated January 10,

d who will also protect their rights. After my response to Mr. I know that he spoke with who was Chief of Appeals at the time, about moving me to the Appellate Section. The results of the disagreements catalogued above were communicated to me (orally or via e-mail) as decisions of the Executive Division. They some

ith the victims prior to the execution of the Non-Prosecution Agreement. An emergency hearing was held on July 11, 2008, before U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra. Since Epstein had entered his state court plea and been sentenced already, the court found there was no emergency. He directed the parties to meet

es 1 and 2 v. United States Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA (S.D.Fla.). We are seeking your advice and guida

bject: RE: Epstein matter Thank you, (USAFLS) ntoi As per our conversation this afternoon, I will leave you to call and I have a call in at the Appellate Section. Assistant U.S. Attorney EFTA00206184

as signed on September 24, 2007. The letters that Judge Marra referred to in his order were dated January 10,

of the agents and myself the matter was, in fact, "currently under investigation." The NPA was signed on September 24, 2007. The letters that Judge Marra referred to in his order were dated January 10, 2008 and May 30, 2008. During the period that the letters were sent, Epstein was asserting that: (a

eir rights. After my response to Mr. Menchel, I know that he spoke with Anne Ruth Schultz, who was Chief of Appeals at the time, about moving me to the Appellate Section. The results of the disagreements catalogued above were communicated to me (orally or via e-mail) as decisions of the Executive Division. They some

h the referenced documents. Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-013227 EFTA00229646 • U.S. Department of J

e trusted to protect the victims' interests. I asked whether he thought Ocariz was suitable for and would be willing to accept the assignment and • the Appellate Section. Contrary to allegations raised by Epstein's attorneys, business relationship with Ocariz; they have been friends since law school. Ile is assigned

lea deal,” Miami Herald, Dec. 6, 2018. 5 Doe v. United States, 359 F. Supp. 3d 1201 (S.D. Fla., Feb. 21, 2019) (Opinion and Order, 9:08-80736-CIV- Marra). v Secretary of Labor. In a brief oral statement, Acosta explained that continued media attention on his handling of the Epstein investig

d by U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and provide legal expertise and policy guidance. Among the Criminal Division components mentioned in this Report are the Appellate Section, the Office of Enforcement Operations, the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, and, most prominently, the Child Exploitation and Obsce