Epstein Secrets

efkowitz [[email protected]] Sent: y, September 27, 2007 2:53 PM To: , Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) Subject: e. onference Call with Bert Ocariz Marie -I will not be able to get back to you until tomorrow. However, some of the questions he raised cause me some serious concern. 1. Can we get a copy

ted expansion of federal law to cover conduct that has always been exclusively within the core of state powers. At this point in time, the need for Departmental oversight is critical. We appreciate this opportunity to submit our assessment of the key facts in this case and review of the pertinent federal st

26 forward with charges in this case. Lourie forwarded a copy of the prosecution memorandum to Menchel. Lourie’s transmittal message read: Marie did a 50 [sic] page pros memo in the Epstein case. I am going to start reading it tonight. . . . It’s a major case because the target is one of t

Chief] Oosterba[an] to participate by teleconference, thereby intercepting the DC meeting. Thoughts? Acosta told OPR that he had no concern about Departmental “scrutiny of the NPA scheme” and that “[i]f anything,” he was concerned whether the Department might direct the USAO to “drop this case.”96 2. Le

to Alex to discuss.” Lourie immediately emailed Acosta the following: I looked at the latest draft from Jay [Lefkowitz] and I must agree with Marie. Based on my own conversations with him, his draft is out of left field. He claims to orally agree to our terms and then sends us a document that

rosecution should Epstein renege on his agreement, and she outlined for Acosta and Sloman the steps she proposed to take while Epstein was pursuing Departmental review. Those steps included re-establishing contact with victims, interviewing victims in New York and one victim who lived in a foreign country,

“I know we would have spoken about this case a lot, okay? And I’m sure with Jeff as well, and there were conversations -- a meeting that I had with Marie and Andy as well.” Lourie similarly told OPR: Well, . . . he would have been talking to Jeff and Matt, talking to me to the extent that he did, h

ent had the “right” to address Epstein’s concerns. He told OPR that because the USAO is part of the Department of Justice, if a defendant asks for Departmental review, it would be “unseemly” to object. During his OPR interview, Sloman described Acosta as very process-oriented, which he attributed to Acosta