Epstein Secrets

pt. 2422(b) Not Consummated Showed up for meeting 48 EFTA00224182 COURT a CASES` FACILITY FACTS/COMMUNICATION CHARGE a 1 l'h Cir. U.S. I Morton, 364 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 2004) Internet Internet chat room "I love older men"; communication followed by telephone calls to several "victims";

Chief of the Criminal Division The United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 99 NE 41' Street Miami, Florida 33132 Dear Mr. Menchel: July 25, 2007 Jeffrey Epstein TELEPHONE '212)737-0400 FACSIMILE 12i P) 9/313-SI92 We have previously provided you with a memo as to why we be

leNtwurtlarzwn SHERYL E. REICH fOCROIRICOURRIP.COM RENATO C. STABILE SiblOSWCOURISW.0:en FAITH A. FRIEDMAN ffriedinarylletcouttlaNcom BY HAND Matthew Menchel, Esq. Chief of the Criminal Division The United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 99 NE 41' Street Miami, Florida 33132 Dea

zen Eleventh Circuit cases that include a prosecutio under §2422(b), most of which involve the prototypical fact pattern. See, e.g., United States'. Morton, 364 F.3d 1300 (I I* Cir. 2004), judgment vacated for Booker consideration, 115 S. Ct. 1338 (2006); United Stalest Grego, 363 F.3d 1093 (II* Cir. 2

EDMAN [email protected] BY FEDERAL EXPRESS TELEPHONE FACSIMILE July 6, 2007 Jeffrey Sloman, Esq., First Assistant United States Attorney Matthew Menchel, Esq., Chief, Criminal Division The United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 99 NE 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 Andrew Lo

s Office Southern District of Florida 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Jeffrey Epstein Dear Messrs. Sloman, Menchel and Lourie and Ms. Villafafia: We write as counsel to Jeffrey Epstein to follow-up on our meeting on June 26, 2007. We thought the meeting was extr

include a prosecution under Garrett, 190 3d 1220 (116 Cir. §2424(b), most of which involve the prototypical fact pattern. See, e.g., United States !Morton, 364 I3d 1300 (I l ° Cij. 2004),judgnwru vacated for Booker consideration, 125 S. Ct. 338 006); United States I Orrega, 363 I3d 1093 (116 Cir. 2004

he state would put an appropriate end to the matter for everyone. EFTA00226776 r LAW 00 ICC,. Y. GERALD B. LEFCOURT. P.C. Jeffrey Sloman, Esq. Matthew Menchel, Esq. Andrew LS. A. Marie , Esq. The Unite!1Mttorney's Office Southern District of Florida July 6,2007 Page 23 Again, we and our colleagues t

zen Eleventh Circuit cases involving prosecutions under § 2422(b), most of which involve this prototypical fact pattern. See, e.g„ United States v. Morton. 364 F3d 1300 (11th Cir. 2004), vacated for further consideration in light stf Booker, 125 S. Ct. 1338 (2006), opinion reinstated by, 144 Fed. Appx.

en to use "a" versus "the" and other minutiae. When you and I could not reach agreement, you repeatedly went over my head, involving Messrs. Lourie, Menchel, Sloman, and Acosta in the negotiations at various times. In any and all plea negotiations the defendant understands that his options are to plead