Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) From: Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 11:08 AM To: Acosta, Alex (USAFLS); Sloman, Jeff (USAFLS); Senior, Robert (USAFLS); Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS); Lee, Dexter (USAFLS) Subject: FW: Follow-up point Just received a response from Jay. I'm not sure what he means about talking "this morning," since I haven't spoken to him today. I don't believe that we should wait two weeks for them to confer. They have the ability to confer over the telephone or to come and visit him (as reported in the Palm Beach Post). Here is my proposed response: Dear Jay: Thank you for your response. It is our position that Mr. Epstein accepted the December modification by his performance. If you prefer to return to the language of the October addendum, we have no objection, but, as you know, I have been ordered to produce the Non-Prosecution Agreement and I cannot wait two weeks to do so. Please advise me by noon on Monday in writing, preferably signed by your client, whether Mr. Epstein intends to perform according to the terms of the December modification or whether he elects to return to the October addendum. If Mr. Epstein elects to perform according to the terms of the October addendum, then please prepare a proposed written submission to the Special Master, in accordance with Paragraph 7B, for my review by Monday afternoon. The extensive delays of the past will no longer be tolerated, and the Office will insist upon a showing of good faith performance in the selection of the attorney representative and all other terms of the Agreement. Sincerely, Marie A. Marie Villafaffa Assistant U.S. Attorney 500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone 561 209-1047 Fax 561 820-8777 From: Jay Lefkowitz imallto:[email protected] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 10:53 AM To: Villafana, Ann Made C (USAFLS) Cc: Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS); Roy BLACK; Martin Weinberg Subject: Re: Follow-up point 336 EFTA00190639

Marie - thanks for responding to my email. You have narrowed down some of the implementation issues. As I told you this morning, we cannot accept your contention that Mr. Epstein is bound by an agreement he didn't sign as opposed to one he did sign, particularly in light of my written communications to your office dated December 21, 2007 and December 26, 2007. However, before we can make a determination whether to adopt the December language as you have now explained it, we need to confer with our client, which we will be able to do within the next two weeks. I look forward to speaking with you soon to resolve these issues. Jay From: "Villafana, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS)" [[email protected]] Sent: 08/14/2008 03:27 PM AST To: Jay Lefkowitz Cc: "Atkinson, Karen (USAFLS)" <[email protected]>; "Roy BLACK" <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Follow-up point Dear Jay: The modification contained in the December letter is clear and simple, that is why we were not surprised by Mr. Epstein's and his attorneys' actions affirming acceptance of the modification. Mr. Epstein's acceptance of the modification by pleading guilty was equally clear and simple -- it followed written communications from Mr. Sloman and myself that read: "Mr. Epstein has until the close of business on Monday, June 30, 2008, to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement between the United States and Mr. Epstein (as modified by the U.S. Attorney's December 19i6letter to Ms. Sanchez), including entry of a guilty plea, sentencing, and surrendering to begin his sentence of imprisonment." As clearly stated in the December letter, only those "individuals whom [the United States] was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense" are the beneficiaries of the agreement. That is the list of names that I provided to Messrs. Goldberger and Tein following the change of plea. Under the September/October agreement, all "individuals whom [the United States] has identified as victims" are the beneficiaries, so I would prepare a supplement to the earlier list to include identified victims whom we were not yet prepared to name in an indictment. Again, as stated in the letter, the modification replaces paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Agreement, including paragraphs 7A through 7C that are included in the October Addendum. This means that Mr. Epstein's waiver of "his right to contest damages up to an amount as agreed to between the identified individual and Epstein" will no longer exist, nor will Mr. Epstein's obligation to pay for the victims' counsel. Paragraphs 9 and 10 are still in effect. This includes the statement that there is no admission of civil or criminal liability, and that, "[e]xcept as to those individuals who elect to proceed EXCLUSIVELY under 18 USC § 2255, .. . Epstein's signature [cannot] be construed as admissions or evidence of civil or criminal liability." This addresses your question regarding exclusivity. I don't think that Mr. Epstein has to make any constructive admissions of conviction. He only needs to admit that the 32 girls whose names I have provided to Mr. Goldberger are "victims" of an offense listed in 18 U.S.C. 2255. 337 EFTA00190640