I was sorry not to have you present at the meeting I had with Dahlia , lanna and  detective Recarey. I was told you had a last minute emergency, and hope the outcome of your meeting was more satisfactory than mine..HAd you been there , I beleive you would now concur in my strong belief that charges, against Jeffrey Epstein should not be brought.  ...I thought it appropriate to give you at least my version of  what transpired at the  meeting  so as to make our  scheduled meeting on thursday the 23, more productive.  IN a kafkaesque scenario, I find myself trying to at the prosecutions request,to  give evidence in an attempt to  rebut charges, and allegations of specific "incidents" of wrongdoing, while at the same time the prosecutors are totally unwilling to detail those allegations.. astonishingly, We have been still  unable to obtain, from them  the details of charges ,the names , place s, time and events under investigation, but are told " if you give us the evidence we will consider it....Lanna confirmed that she you and dahlia, and considered a fair resolution, but you had decided that due to recarey's , discontent, to send the case to a grand jury. As I had, responded to you on the phone, I trust your experience, balanced, mature view, of the overall circumstances , far more than I would a Grand jury..  As , they would simply see , a young woman , who suggests wrongdoing, look at the statute, and have little choice but to indict. The woman traditionally is obvioulsy not  subject to even the slightest cross examination, and her history , lack of credibility, and in some cases, arrest, drug use, and in the  specific case of Alexandra Hall ,what we understand to be the main witness,  . confessed incidents of theft.were not even brought to the prosecutors attention , nevermind the grand jurys'.TO remind you this girl was arrested for marijuana posession in september , did community service, in october, and immediatly upon completion was fell back into her well established pattern of breaking the law.SEperate from her admitted drug use and web pages that we have previouly forwarded to you, we have in our posesions her e- mails where she referrs to her " illigimate occupation". I've attached the incident report that we gave to Lanna , clearly illustrating these facts.  I did this however after, much trepidation, over providing to your office, evidence that is  one of our most sensitive documents , clearly  that would be used to totally destroy MS Halls credibility at the unlikely event of a trial.  THis was provided as well as a charge slip that confirms that when ms Hall bought the strap on dildo, from her favorite sex shop. she had obvioulsy been above the age of eighteen.... I don't want to appear flippant where such an important matter is at stake, but IF I were detective recarey, and had bought into  what is  now the obvious lies of miss hall, and understood yiddish, when I saw the proof that we had been referring to, I would "plotz". ...  I spent some time at the meeting, reiterating my view, that I know that you share, that in instances of age related offenses, that both the responsibility and the precedent of your office is to excercise discretion with both breadth and justice.. I referred to the Supreme court of Wisconsin case where judge abrahamson made the relevant observation,  In strict liability offenses, perhaps  ...insert----...In this case, unlike the Harley case that you agreed, was not the case to which you had referred, Lanna still thought there was a connection between Harleys forty years that began with strong arm rape, shooting into an occupied building, stolen merchandise  etc. with Mr Epsteins history of philanthropy on a rarely found scale. medicine , israel. science, education, the arts, as well as participation in world bodies, including the Trilateral COmmision , and the council on foreign affairs..  IF there was ever a poster boy example for the excercise of prosecutorial discretion. this is it.Alexandra hall had told others that she was determined to be really really rich and would do absolutly anything , to accomplish that goal... Her offering anal sex, or stealing the magazine detailing Mr Epstein's accomplishmnets, wer simply steps she saw as part of her plan..SHe was turned down when she wanted to ride on his plane,( our guess, and only a guess, why Recarey as late as last week . appraochd Mr Epstein's pilot and told him quite unncessarily that he had been investigatin MR Epstein since 2004 and had asked informed him for the first time that there was an investigation regarding fourteen year old girls..  It would have saved a great deal of time and trouble for both my client and your office had the detective taken even the simple step of checking to see if Alexandra had a juvnile record... we did , she did , and we informed recarey at the meeting....... AS you have acknwoledged, we have been as cooperative as possible, but I must admit until today it's been quite a one way street, as the prosecutors, still refuse to even tell us the names of their supossed witnesses... IF they were in fact in Mr Epstein's house, he obviously must know them,, so why not tell him who they are.. AT our first meeting you had specifically told me that you would never bring a touching, case,,, but when I ask if there is more than that, I'm met with "Im sorry there is an ongoing investigation,  and if you like to refute the secret facts please do as soon s possible.. This is obviously not fair.. Lanna responded to this concern with the statment , that this is always how it is with Grand Juries.. however, as you will certanily agree, as we can't find any precedent in your office for a case where a man if all your  alleged facts are to be believed, is in no position other than the recent massage parlor visitor, who  in one instance said he had visited the establishment over two hundred times.and was never prosecuted..  With regard precedent, we have still not been able to find a similar case, including the one to which you referred taht began as an elderly abuse case.. In fact guy Fronsteins' has had someone at the courthouse researching for two weeks, as well as my researchers for considerably longer, and neither of us, have found a similar case.. There is no allegation regarding a person in position of authority, no coercion, no drugs , alcohol , or agression of any kind.  In fact it is readily acknowledged that the girls were knowingly coming to Palm Beach to give a topless massage.  It would be a setting a new precedent without  comparision to charge a person in this circumstance..  Dahlia had said that the aggravting circumstance in this case ws " volume..."  I responded that in fact  if touching was not of interest to the office,(I recall the story of the fifteen year old stripper, that you said would never cause a prosecution) then in fact "volume" was the best example that my client did nothing more... As I'm sure you were told only a very few number of girls that may have  slipped through his precations, have alleged anything more serious... This is not the pattern of Mr Harley , who would never pass up the opportunity to video tape his victims without their knowldge,  then attempt to sell the tapes, and had a clear understanding thatthe girls  were being m paid for sex, and his only possible defense was I'm sorry but that man  , naked on the video tape in my bed who shares my body  is not really me...  ... The last half hour of the meeting seemd to be more constructive an began  moving toward a resolution .. Lanna had initially said that she and Dahlia had considered  a plea to three misdemeanor charges of "contributing to the deliquency of a minor", , I was adamant that we could not agree to that charge, as not only would it be  grossly unfair but a public  sex charge would not only damamge my client , but would harm innocent third parties, who would no longer be able to accept his well established charity... She then  suggested something she referred to as pre trial intervention...  I was unfamiliar with the concept.. but she thought this  idea might lead to a possible solution.. I suggested that the charge would have to be  be a non sex related  charge as  I think we agreed that a  sex charge  didn't add anything to the pound of flesh that your office appears  to be focused on receiving.(simple battery) I said that I  thought that an unfair but expeditious resolution might be in my client's best interest , especially in the light of the threat of the aformentioned ,  one sided grand jury proceding ,  and suggested we  might agree to a deferred prosecution,  .. Dahlia said she thought this was  tantamount to getting  nothing , but I strongly disagreed, as did Guy.  As Mr. Epstein would I believe agree to  reasonable restrictions on his future behavior , without  effecting his charity. The contract, for this or a pre trial diversion, could be I believe ,be  negotiated with your office to meet all our  various needs ,justice , and be done in a non-public way, giving everyone what appears to be  a win- win situation.