Epstein Secrets

Ms. Villafana submitted an amicus curae brief to Judge Marra stating in her own words that the protections Mr

ses while the USAO's obligations under the NPA not to prosecute Epstein still remained open, Ms. Villafana submitted an amicus curae brief to Judge Marra stating in her own words that the protections Mr. Epstein thought he bargained for in the NPA were "illusory", and indicating that the federal gove

y as yet unnamed plaintiffs, and (3) the risk that the promise of uncontested damages may compromise so called "victim" testimony, all of which Mr. Whitley advised made it important that the NPA be reviewed at the highest levels of the Justice Department. See December 5, 2007 Memorandum of J. Whitley t

t of Florida, No. 9:08-cv-80736- ICAM, Kenneth A. Marra, Senior District Judge, 359 F.Supp.3d 1201, dete

lleged perpetrator. Alleged perpetrator intervened. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, No. 9:08-cv-80736- ICAM, Kenneth A. Marra, Senior District Judge, 359 F.Supp.3d 1201, determined that government had violated CVRA, but after alleged perpetrator's death, alleged victim's

39, 117 S. Ct. 417, 421, 136 L.Ed.2d 347 (1996) ("We have long held that the 'touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is reasonableness."); / Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 432-33, 115 S. Ct. 1555, 1565, 131 L.Ed.2d 490 (1995) (under the Due Process Clause and 11 Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct

t, John McMillan, and Atkinson32 re: 1:11 before Judge Marra 68. 9/17/2007, 11:45 am Email from to Lefkow

n McMillan, and Atkinson32 re: 1:11 before Judge Marra 68. 9/17/2007, 11:45 am Email from to Lefkow

rom to Lefkowitz re: deadline to comply with the agreement resolving Epstein's federal and state liabilities 193. 5/19/2008 Letter from Starr and Whitley to Filip43 re: asking him to review the federal involvement in Epstein's matter S Chief, Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Department of J

I t.'"...1. ;Or • > EXHIBIT B-127 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014941 57 EFTA00224728 U.S. Department of

suggests that this is politically motivated because Epstein is a prominent figure with "close ties to former President Clinton." Messrs. Starr and Whitley go on to claim that 1/FAUSA Sloman unilaterally, arbitrarily and unnecessarily imposed a June 2, 2008 deadline in order to prevent Epstein from see

ageiee ted Feb 1a ge 2 date. 1353 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014715 EFTA00225177 U.S. Department of Just

e Agreement, the SDFL unilaterally proposed to divest its right to select the attorney representative for the victims. Contrary to Messrs. Starr and Whitley's recent assertion that this was "engineered in a way that appears intended to profit particular lawyers in private practice in South Florida with

draft letter to DAG EXHIBIT B-I27 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-014941 57 EFTA00225328 U.S. Department of

suggests that this is politically motivated because Epstein is a prominent figure with "close ties to former President Clinton." Messrs. Starr and Whitley go on to claim that 1/FAUSA Sloman unilaterally, arbitrarily and unnecessarily imposed a June 2, 2008 deadline in order to prevent Epstein from see

nior, Robert (USAFLS) please review 08-80736-CV-MARRA se EXHIBIT B-128 P-014955 EFTA00225342 U.S.

Agreement, the SDFL unilaterally proposed to divest its right to select the attorney representative for the victims. Contrary to Messrs. Starr and Whitley's recent assertion that this was "engineered in a way that appears intended to profit particular lawyers in private practice in South Florida with p

vernment, and openings are set 2724 08-80736-CV-MARRA REP WPB-002020 EFTA00184828 Case 9:08-cv-8073

r concerns on this matter. I respectfully request that you consider the issues I discuss below in conjunction with the ethics opinion of Mr. Joe I). Whitley that I faxed to your Office on December 7. Background of Negotiations believe it is important for you to be aware of the full scope and substance

gotiations? Tracking: 268 Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-013329 EFTA00230234 LIM° 7 1Xiskat,olh /2)

e Agreement, the SDFL unilaterally proposed to divest its right to select the attorney representative for the victims. Contrary to Messrs. Starr and Whitley's recent assertion that this was "engineered in a way that appears intended to profit particular lawyers in private practice in South Florida with