Epstein Secrets

ng) that they had already negotiated a non-prosecution agreement with Epstein. Exhibit "H." 38. On about February 25, 2008, Assistant U.S. Attorney Sloman sent an e-mail to Jay Lefkowitz, Epstein's criminal defense counsel, explaining that the Justice Department's Child 17 08-80736-CV-MARRA 000687

s of the CVRA and, indeed, pressured the U.S. Attorney's Office to commit those violations. Tr. July 11, 2008, at 9. 26. On about December 6, 2007, Jeffrey H. Sloman, First Assistant U.S. Attorney sent a letter to Jay Lefkowitz, noting the U.S. Attorney's Office's legal obligations to keep victims informed of th

move forward towards possible prosecution. Tr. July 11, 2008, at 4-6, 18-19, 22-23, 28-29. 23. On about November 27, 2007, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeff Sloman sent an e-mail to Jay Lefkowitz, defense counsel for Epstein. The e-mail stated that the U.S. Attorney's Office had an obligation to notify the vic

randum Subject Jane Does Nos. 1 and 2.'. United States, Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA (S.D.Fla.) Daft April 26, 2011 To From Assistant Counsel Office of Professional Responsibility U.S. Department of Justice VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS 99 N.E. 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132 Attached please fmd a CD-ROM containing the victims' Moti

Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) From: Sloman. Jeff (USAFLS) Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 5:26 PM To: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS); Acosta, Alex (USAFLS) Subject: Fw: Epstein Fyi Se

bpoena to Paul A. Lavery (return date 5/29/07) 59 5/22/2007 Andrew Cootie Gerald B. Lefcourt Letter requesting to meet with Matthew Menchel and Jeffrey Sloman and \ lc\ Acosta prior to an indictment being filed 28 5/22/2007 Matthew Menchel and Jeff Sloman; cc: A. Marie Villafalia Andrew Laurie Email

/2008 VilLiana letter to Capt. Sleeth, Palm Beach Sheriffs Office, mganling Epstein's work release application 85 6/9/2009 Vadatla Memorandum to Sloman, Senior, Garcia, awl Atkinson seeking permission to declare breach with attachments awl proposal breach letter 86 6/9/2009 Signed indictment packa

osure is "in connection with a judicial proceeding," that is, in connection with an administrative proceeding conducted by the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) arising out of a decision by United States District Judge Kenneth A. Marra in the matter of Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2I United States, S.D. Fl

orized release; Material Severable; Redaction; No Assertion by Victims Box #2 P-008517 Thru P-008535 6/25/2007 Letter from Gerald Lefcourt to Jeffrey Sloman and Andrew Lourie [pursuant to Court's Order, not being withheld as privileged — will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by I Ith

onship; Claims Against Public Prosecutor; Overriding Need; Attorney Conduct at Issue Suppl. Box #3 P-013334 Thru File folder entitled "11/13/07 Sloman to Lefkowitz (was this sent?)" containing draft 11/13/07 letter from J. Sloman Attorney-Client Privilege Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnings

3 Page 45 of 70 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Victims' Objections Box #3 P-013227 April 23, 2008 Memo from Jeffrey Sloman to Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Reporting, Corrected Version of the previously submitted April 21, 2008 Letter to OPR Privacy Act Inadequate Log; No Factual Underpinnin

Jay Lefkowitz, Kirkland & Ellis Letter to Jay P. Lefkowitz, Esq., Kirkland & Ellis, dated December 6, 2007, RE: Jeffrey Epstein (4 pages); Author: Jeffrey H. Sloman, First Assistant U.S. Attorney, with attached draft letter RE: Crime Victims' Rights — Notification of Resolution of Epstein Investigation (4 pages

(5 pages); Author: A. Marie Villafana. E-mail, Jay Lefkowitz to Alex Acosta, dated February 29, 2008 3:11 p.m., RE: Fw Epstein (1 page) Letter to Office of Professional Responsibility, U.S. Department of Justice, dated April 21, 2008, RE: Self Reporting — Jeffrey H. Sloman, FAUSA S.D.F.L. (3 pages, with 5 pages of attachments); A

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 “

tions. Conclusion We bring these difficult and delicate matters of misconduct to your attention not to require any disciplinary action or review by the Office of Professional Responsibility. Although we have been told that some of this misconduct has been self-reported (only after we raised these complaints in writing), we feel confident