Epstein Secrets

V, wit JAN 2i 2,2!3 .a4P En M ZIP t20-12E 3330 Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafatia 500 S. Australian Ave., Sui

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that the foregoing document was served on January 21, 20 I 5, on the following using the Court's CM/ECF system: Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafafia 500 S. Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 Fax: (561) 820-8777 E-mail: [email protected] E-

— communicate or otherwise interact improperly with persons who turn out to be minors. A prosecution of Mr. Epstein would violate the teachings of Bailey and Panfil. As we believe we persuaded you at the June 26th meeting, Mr. Epstein never targeted minors. On the contrary, what he did — at worst — w

ith law. Most of my death cases were centered on forensics and applied science. Even before the popularity of such television shows as CSI, Bones and Dexter, I had developed an expertise in the scientific aspects of homicide cases. My academic focus has been on the interface of law and science, and so it

ourt challenging this practice in the case of Miller v. California. The Supreme Court granted my petition for review, but then after oral argument by Bailey, the justices denied the review over a strong dissent. 182 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017269 4.2.12 WC: 191694 were mitror image round stains on all four su

the following using the Court's CM/ECF system: Dexter Lee A. Marie Villafafia 500 S. Australian Ave., Sui

rt its argument, the Government relies on the presumption "that Congress intends to change the law when it enacts amendments." DE 401-2 at 8 (citing Bailey v. United States 52 Fed. Cl. 105, 110 (2002)). According to the Government, the fact that Congress 19 EFTA00799906 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Docume

ent and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment was filed with the Clerk of the Court and served on counsel on the attached service list using CM/ECF. Is/Dexter A. Lee Dexter A. Lee Assistant United States Attorney 31 EFTA00799855 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 408 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/06/2017 Page 32 of 3

s.... This legislation will help for all of those reasons."). The presumption is that Congress intends to change the law when it enacts amendments. Bailey v. United States, 52 Fed. Cl. 105, 110 (2002), citin Wallace v. Jaffree 472 U.S. 38, 59 n.48 (1985). Here, not only did Congress change the law by c

ent and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment was filed with the Clerk of the Court and served on counsel on the attached service list using CM/ECF. Is/Dexter A. Lee Dexter A. Lee Assistant United States Attorney 31 EFTA00591492 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 401-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 33 of

s.... This legislation will help for all of those reasons."). The presumption is that Congress intends to change the law when it enacts amendments. Bailey v. United States, 52 Fed. Cl. 105, 110 (2002), citin Wallace v. Jaffree 472 U.S. 38, 59 n.48 (1985). Here, not only did Congress change the law by c

. 12. I never learned any confidential, non-public information about the Epstein matter. 13. In late December 2007, I had an "exit meeting" with Dexter Lee, the Office's ethics officer. As part of that meeting, Mr. Lee reviewed with me the Department of Justice's post-employment restrictions. Based on

anon of statutory construction that "discourages courts from adopting a reading of a statute that renders any part of the statute mere surplusage." Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 146 (1995)(noting that each word in a statute is intended to have "particular, nonsuperfluous meaning"). Congress i

r. 12. I never teamed any confidential, non-public information about the Epstein matter. 13. In late December 2007, I had an "exit meeting" with Dexter Lee, the Office's ethics officer. As part of that meeting, Mr. Lee reviewed with me the Department of Justice's post-employment restrictions. Based on

anon of statutory construction that "discourages courts from adopting a reading of a statute that renders any part of the statute mere surplusage." Bailey'. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 146 (1995)(noting that each word in a statute is intended to have "particular, nonsuperfluous meaning"). Congress in