Epstein Secrets

npersuaded by the letter and the presentation, but I agreed that I should carefully review transcripts of the recorded statements given to PBPD for Brady issues.15 Since witness credibility was clearly at the fore, I undertook efforts 14 The requested documents and items were never provided. 15 As th

xhibit B-91). On September 15, 2008, I sent Notification Letters to Individuals 18 and 32 (Exhibit B-92). Soon thereafter, I received I letter from Jeffrey Herman, one of the civil attorneys who represented I number of victims, notifying me that he had complained to the Florida Bar that the Victim Notificatio

each was astonished that any evidence Ms. Villafana purported to have was not shared with the State or made available to Mr Epstein's attorneys as Brady evidence. Ms. Villafana launched a totally unsupportable and vastly overreaching sex trafficking investigation without providing notification to th

the public at large, the civil remedy provisions in the NPA encouraged other plaintiffs' attorneys, such as First AUSA Sloman's former law partner, Jeffrey Herman (see below), and Ms. Villafana's confidential informant, Brad Edwards (see below), to obtain assistance from Ms. Villafana and the USAO in their ca

it has identified. Because the information provided by these women goes directly to the question of Mr. Epstein's guilt or innocence, it is classic Brady information. We understand that the U.S. Attorney might not want to disclose impeachment information about their witnesses prior to a charge or dur

"victims" until after Epstein was sentenced and incarcerated. 38. We have reason to believe that, around this same time, Mr. former law partner, Jeffrey Herman, had met with the father of one of the prospective plaintiffs, Saige Gonzalez.5 At the same time (and until as recent] as March of 2008), the Offici

npersuaded by the letter and the presentation, but I agreed that I should carefully review transcripts of the recorded statements given to PBPD for Brady issues." Since witness credibility was clearly at the fore, I undertook efforts " The requested documents and items were never provided. 15 As the

n Email regarding proposed response to Goldberger B 65 7/10/2008 Victim Notification letters to Individuals #3 (via Richard H. Willits), #8 (via Jeffrey Herman), ##17 (via Theodore J. Leopold), #25 (via Jeffrey Herman), #26 (via Jeffrey Herman), #37 (via Michael E. Dutko), and #44 (via Jeffrey Herman) B-6

s it has identified. Because the information provided by these women goes directly to the question of Mr. Epstein’s guilt or innocence, it is classic Brady information. We understand that the U.S. Attorney might not want to disclose impeachment information about their witnesses prior to a charge or durin

victims” until after Epstein was sentenced and incarcerated. We have reason to believe that, around this same time, Mr. Sloman’s former law partner, Jeffrey Herman, had met with the father of one of the prospective plaintiffs, Saige Gonzalez.> At the same time (and until as recently as March of 2008), the Offici