Epstein Secrets

that “there was an agreement reached” and “we would not be pursuing this federally.” In October 2007, for example, the case agents met with victim Courtney Wild, “to advise her of the main terms of the Non-Prosecution Agreement.” According to the case agent, during that meeting, the case agents told Wild “t

ey Wild, “to advise her of the main terms of the Non-Prosecution Agreement.” According to the case agent, during that meeting, the case agents told Wild “that an agreement had been reached, Mr. Epstein was going to plead guilty to two state charges, and there would not be a federal prosecution.”302

efforts to obtain the missing computers, but he believed that “there was a desire to move quickly as opposed to slowly” regarding the plea. Menchel, Sloman, and Lourie also all told OPR that they did not remember Villafaña’s efforts to obtain the computers or recalled the issue only “vaguely.”

th the USAO’s demand for the equipment. In late June 2007, defense attorney Sanchez requested an extension of time to comply; in informing Sloman, Menchel, and Lourie of the request, Villafaña stressed that “we want to get the computer equipment that was removed from Epstein’s home prior to the state s

ded to Acosta charging Epstein by criminal complaint and offering a plea to conspiracy “to make a plea attractive.” Similarly, before learning that Menchel had already discussed a state-based resolution with Epstein’s counsel, Villafaña had considered offering Epstein a plea to one count of conspiracy

id not inform them about the NPA.431 On January 31, 2008, the FBI agents, Villafana, and the CEOS Trial Attorney interviewed three victims, including Courtney Wild, and they interviewed at least one more victim the next day.432 Wild and two others had been contacted by the FBI in the fall of 2007 and may have be

t this time of the state plea; rather, she likely only told those who knew about the resolution from the FBI. In her own 2015 CVRA- case declaration, Wild stated that she “was not told about any [NPA] or any potential resolution of 431 FBI agents also interviewed victims in March and May of 2008, withou

e case through the NPA or in the negotiations leading to the agreement: former U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, and former AUSAs Jeffrey H. Sloman, Matthew I. Menchel, Andrew C. Lourie, and Ann Marie C. Villafana. Each subject submitted written responses detailing their involvement in the federal investigation of E

ttorneys to disenfranchise and silence the victims. It is unfortunate, and appears fundamentally unfair to the victims, that Acosta and Sloman (after Menchel and Lourie departed) took the unusual step of deciding to vet the USAO victim notification letters with the defense after the NPA was signed, but fai

the experience.feeling confused and believing she had been misled. OPR did not find evidence supporting a conclusion that Villafana, Acosta, Sloman, Menchel, or Lourie opted not to consult with the victims in order to protect Epstein or shield the NPA from public scrutiny. Although neither Sloman nor Acos

ent’s interactions with victims, OPR concludes that victims were not treated with the forthrightness and sensitivity expected by the Department. Wild’s criticisms of the government’s conduct were based on interactions that are similar to and generally representative of the government’s interaction

rneys to disenfranchise and silence the victims. It is unfortunate, and appears fundamentally unfair to the victims, that Acosta and Sloman (after Menchel and Lourie departed) took the unusual step of deciding to vet the USAO victim notification letters with the defense after the NPA was signed, but fa

ase through the NPA or in the negotiations leading to the agreement: former U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, and former AUSAs Jeffrey H. Sloman, Matthew I. Menchel, Andrew C. Lourie, and Ann Marie C. Villafaña. Each subject submitted written responses detailing their involvement in the federal investigation o

perience feeling confused and believing she had been misled. OPR did not find evidence supporting a conclusion that Villafaña, Acosta, Sloman, Menchel, or Lourie opted not to consult with the victims in order to protect Epstein or shield the NPA from public scrutiny. Although neither Sloman nor Ac

t resulted in serious injury to Mr. Epstein. A copy of the Complaint is enclosed with this letter. ou sr know, Rothstein's firm represents and Wilde, three of the plaintiffs who have rou t civil actions against Mr. Epstein. The Rothstein firm was a criminal enterprise that used the litigation a

it is whether they can require the defendant to serve a sentence that was not even "available" to State prosecutors. Id. In this case, however, Mr. Menchel has not asked for anything that State prosecutors could not have obtained. The fact that State authorities chose—for unquestionably legitimate reaso

without substantiation, that the proposed State plea agreement failed to vindicate the federal interest. On August 3, 2007, Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Menchel rejected the State's new proposed plea agreement. He flatly stated that "the federal interest will not be vindicated in the absence of a two year te

alty of perjury, stating that after the execution of, but before Mr. Epstein began to perform, the NPA, Ms. Villafana, herself, secured counsel for Courtney Wilde (as well as other women on Ms. Villafana's secret list) to assist Ms. Wilde in resisting deposition subpoenas from Mr. Epstein's counsel. Through h

perform, the NPA, Ms. Villafana, herself, secured counsel for Courtney Wilde (as well as other women on Ms. Villafana's secret list) to assist Ms. Wilde in resisting deposition subpoenas from Mr. Epstein's counsel. Through her interactions with Ms. Villafana and the counsel Ms. Villafana secured for

As a weak explanation of the many complaints about Ms. Villafana's misconduct and her flagrant violations of the USAM, her Criminal Division Chief, Matthew Menchel, eventually characterized her as "unsupervisable." In August 2007, Ms. Villafana demanded that, in exchange for a deferral of federal prosecution,