Epstein Secrets

with resolving the case against Epstein. In November and December 2006, subpoenas were served on two other Epstein employees — Janusz Banasiak and Mucinska. Both initially asked for immunity. After speaking with Banasiak's attorney, Mr. Banasiak was satisfied with I standard Kastigar letter, but Ms. Muc

obligations if not forced to pay.23 As part of my duties as PSC Coordinator, on September 26, 2006, I had prepared I memo to management summarizing the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (the "Adam Walsh Act") (Exhibit 16). One of the provisions of the Adam Walsh Act that I noted was an amendment to 18 U.S.C.

tached as Exhibit 24). Indeed, going a step further, on October 8, 2009, Epstein took the Fifth when asked whether he even knew Dershowitz was a 38 Mucinska also took the Fifth when asked about the involvement of Prince Andrew, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Jean Luc Brunel. id. at 37:3, 85:12, 85:13. 32 EFTA0

sdiction to tackle. Theinandatory minimum sentence for a violation of this section was increased from five years to ten years in 2006, by virtue of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, which also eliminated any statute of limitations. See 18 U.S.C. M IA_CEOS_00078 EFTA00191445 LAW °MCC.' or GERALD B. LE

asiak Both initially asked for immunity. After speaking with Banasiak's attorney, r. anasi was satisfied with a standard Kastigar letter, but Ms. Mucinska's attorney was insistent on formal immunity, and as noted above, so was Individual #28. I don't believe that, prior to this investigation, I had ev

obligations if not forced to pay.23 As part of my duties as PSC Coordinator, on September 26, 2006, I had prepared a memo to management summarizing the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (the "Adam Walsh Act") (Exhibit 16). One of the provisions of the Adam Walsh Act that I noted was an amendment to 18 U.S.C.