Epstein Secrets

ith a copy of the prosecution memo related to the indictment. On September 7, 2007, Epstein's attorneys met with the U.S. Attorney, Drew Oosterbaan, Jeff Sloman, John McMillan, and I. Ken Starr presented federalism arguments, urging deferral to state prosecution. When those arguments failed, Epstein's attor

8-80736-CV-MARRA P-0 I 1789 EFTA00192835 Memorandum Subjeci Operation Leap Year: Notification of Breach USAO No. 2006R0 181 June 9, 2009 To Jeffrey H. Sloman Acting United States Attorney Robert K. Senior First Assistant U.S. Attorney Rolando Garcia Deputy Chief, Criminal Division, West Palm Beach Ka

Page 28 of 36 the same act are intended to have the same meaning.") (quotation and citation omitted). Two Mann Act cases are particularly apt. In Hansen', Half, 291 U.S. 559 (1934), the Government charged the defendant with violating the Mann Act after she returned to the country with a man with who

e Agreement. We, like you, are eager to achieve finality in this matter. Kenneth W. Starr cc: Honorable Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey H. Sloman, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Chicago Hong Kong London Munich Now York San Francisco Washington, D.C. EFTA00176207 12/07/07 FRI 15:34 FAX

t to engage in sexual activity with a minor in another state. The travel must be for the purpose of engaging in the unlawful sexual act. See also Hansen,. Huff, 291 U.S. 559, 562-63 (1934) and Mortensen I. United States, 322 U.S. 369, 374 (1944) ("An intention that the women or girls shall engage in

t responds to CEOS’s assessment of its limited review of Mr. Epstein’s case; and a point-by- point rebuttal to First Assistant United States Attorney Jeffrey Sloman’s recent letter which we believe contains factual inaccuracies typical of our correspondence from the United States Attorney’s Office in Miami (the “

l court decisions watering down the “for the purpose of “ requirement fly in the face of the two Supreme Court decisions addressing that element. See Hansen v. Huff, 291 U.S. 559 (1934); Mortensen v. United States, 322 U.S. 369 (1944). Santos and Cuellar speak loudly and clearly against prosecutors seeing