With this in mind, l have considered defense counsel arguments regarding the Section 2255 portions of the Agreement. As I previously observed, our intent has been to place the victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less. From our meeting, it appears that the defense agrees that this was the intent. During the course of negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Paragraphs 7 and 8, which as l wrote previously, appear far from simple to understand. I would thus propose that we solve our disagreements over interpretations by saying precisely what we mean, in a simple fashion. I would replace Paragraphs 7 and 8 with the following language: "Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the panics to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." 2 EFTA00233429

1111111111111 Sinccrcly, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 3 EFTA00233430

IN RE: INVESTIGATION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT IT APPEARING that the City of Palm Beach Police Department and the State Attorney's Office for the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (hereinafter, the "State Attorney's Office") have conducted an investigation into the conduct of Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"); IT APPEARING that the State Attorney's Office has charged Epstein by indictment with solicitation of prostitution, in violation of Florida Statutes Section 796.07; IT APPEARING that the United States Attorney's Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have conducted their own investigation into Epstein's background and any offenses that may have been committed by Epstein against the United States from in or around 2001 through in or around September 2007, including: (I) knowingly and willfully conspiring with others known and unknown to commit an offense against the United States, that is, to use a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce to knowingly persuade, induce, or entice minor females to engage in prostitution, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2422(b); all in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371; (2) knowingly and willfully conspiring with others known and unknown to travel in interstate commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2423(f), with minor females, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2423(b); all in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2423(e); (3) using a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce to knowingly persuade, induce, or entice minor females to engage in prostitution; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2422(b) and 2; (4) traveling in interstate commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2423(f), with minor females; in violation Page 1 of 7 EFTA00233431

of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2423(b); and (5) knowingly, in and affecting interstate and foreign commerce, recruiting, enticing, and obtaining by any means a person, knowing that the person had not attained the age of 18 years and would be caused to engage in a commercial sex act as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1591(c)(1); in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1591(a)(1) and 2; and IT APPEARING that Epstein seeks to resolve globally his state and federal criminal liability and Epstein understands and acknowledges that, in exchange for the benefits provided by this agreement, he agrees to comply with its terms, including undertaking certain actions with the State Attorney's Office; IT APPEARING, after an investigation of the offenses and Epstein's background by both State and Federal law enforcement agencies, and after due consultation with the State Attorney's Office, that the interests of the United States, the State of Florida, and the Defendant will be served by the following procedure; THEREFORE, on the authority of R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, prosecution in this District for these offenses shall be deferred in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, provided that Epstein abides by the following conditions and the requirements of this Agreement set forth below, If the United States Attorney should determine, based on reliable evidence, that, during the period of the Agreement, Epstein willfully violated any of the conditions of this Agreement, then the United States Attorney may, within ninety (90) days following the expiration of the term of home confinement discussed below, provide Epstein with timely notice specifying the condition(s) of the Agreement that he has violated, and shall initiate its prosecution on any offense within sixty (60) days' of giving notice of the violation. Any notice provided to Epstein pursuant to this paragraph shall be provided within 60 days of the United States learning of facts which may provide a basis for a determination of a breach of the Agreement. After timely fulfilling all the terms and conditions of the Agreement, no prosecution for the offenses set out on pages 1 and 2 of this Agreement, nor any other offenses that have been the subject of the joint investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the United States Attorney's Office, nor any offenses that arose from the Federal Grand Jury investigation will be instituted in this District, and the charges against Epstein if any, will be dismissed. Page 2 of 7 EFTA00233432

Terms of the Agreement: 1. Epstein shall plead guilty (not nob contendere) to the Indictment as currently pending against him in the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (Case No. 2006-cf-009495AXXXN113) charging one (1) count of solicitation of prostitution, in violation of Fl. Stat. § 796.07. In addition, Epstein shall plead guilty to an Information filed by the State Attorney's Office charging Epstein with an offense that requires him to register as a sex offender, that is, the solicitation of minors to engage in prostitution, in violation of Florida Statutes Section 796.03; 2. Epstein shall make a binding recommendation that the Court impose a thirty (30) month sentence to be divided as follows: (a) Epstein shall be sentenced to consecutive terms of twelve (12) months and six (6) months in county jail for all charges, without any opportunity for withholding adjudication or sentencing, and without probation or community control in lieu of imprisonment; and (b) Epstein shall be sentenced to a term of twelve (12) months of community control consecutive to his two terms in county jail as described in Term 2(a), supra. 3. This agreement is contingent upon a Judge of the 15th Judicial Circuit accepting and executing the sentence agreed upon between the State Attorney's Office and Epstein, the details of which are set forth in this agreement. 4. The terms contained in paragraphs 1 and 2, supra, do not foreclose Epstein and the State Attorney's Office from agreeing to recommend any additional charge(s) or any additional term(s) of probation and/or incarceration. 5. Epstein shall waive all challenges to the Information filed by the State Attorney's Office and shall waive the right to appeal his conviction and sentence, except a sentence that exceeds what is set forth in paragraph (2), supra. 6. Epstein shall provide to the U.S. Attorney's Office copies of all Page 3 of 7 EFTA00233433

proposed agreements with the State Attorney's Office prior to entering into those agreements. 7. The United States shall provide Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it has identified as victims, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2255, atter Epstein has signed this agreement and been sentenced. Upon the execution of this agreement, the United States, in consultation with and subject to the good faith approval of Epstein's counsel, shall select an attorney representative for these persons, who shall be paid for by Epstein. Epstein's counsel may contact the identified individuals through that representative. 8. If any of the individuals referred to in paragraph (7), supra, elects to file suit pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255, Epstein will not contest the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida over his person and/or the subject matter, and Epstein waives his right to contest liability and also waives his right to contest damages up to an amount as agreed to between the identified individual and Epstein, so long as the identified individual elects to proceed exclusively under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and agrees to waive any other claim for damages, whether pursuant to state, federal, or common law. Notwithstanding this waiver, as to those individuals whose names appear on the list provided by the United States, Epstein's signature on this agreement, his waivers and failures to contest liability and such damages in any suit are not to be construed as an admission of any criminal or civil liability. 9. Epstein's signature on this agreement also is not to be construed as an admission of civil or criminal liability or a waiver of any jurisdictional or other defense as to any person whose name does not appear on the list provided by the United States. 10. Except as to those individuals who elect to proceed exclusively under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, as set forth in paragraph (8), supra, neither Epstein's signature on this agreement, nor its terms, nor any resulting waivers or settlements by Epstein are to be construed as admissions or evidence of civil or criminal liability or a waiver of any jurisdictional or other defense as to any person, whether or not her name appears on the list provided by the United States. 11. Epstein shall use his best efforts to enter his guilty plea and be Page 4 of 7 EFTA00233434

sentenced not later than October 26, 2007. The United States has no objection to Epstein self-reporting to begin serving his sentence not later than January 4, 2008. 12. Epstein agrees that he will not be afforded any benefits with respect to gain time, other than the rights, opportunities, and benefits as any other inmate, including but not limited to, eligibility for gain time credit based on standard rules and regulations that apply in the State of Florida. At the United States' request, Epstein agrees to provide an accounting of the gain time he earned during his period of incarceration. 13. The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstein before making that disclosure. Epstein understands that the United States Attorney has no authority to require the State Attorney's Office to abide by any terms of this agreement. Epstein understands that it is his obligation to undertake discussions with the State Attorney's Office and to use his best efforts to ensure compliance with these procedures, which compliance will be necessary to satisfy the United States' interest. Epstein also understands that it is his obligation to use his best efforts to convince the Judge of the 15th Judicial Circuit to accept Epstein's binding recommcndation regarding the sentence to be imposed, and understands that the failure to do so will be a breach of the agreement. In consideration of Epstein's agreement to plead guilty and to provide compensation in the manner described above, if Epstein successfully fulfills all of the terms and conditions of this agreement, the United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against an potential co-conspirators of including but not limited Further, upon e ecution o agreement and a plea agreement with the State ttorney's Office, the federal Grand Jury investigation will be suspended, and all pending federal Grand Jury subpoenas will be held in abeyance unless and until the defendant violates any term of this agreement. The defendant likewise agrees to withdraw his pending motion to intervene and to quash certain grand jury subpoenas. Both parties agree to maintain their evidence, specifically evidence requested by or directly related to the grand jury subpoenas that have been issued, and including certain computer equipment, inviolate until all of the terms of this agreement have been satisfied. Upon the successful completion of the terms of this agreement, all outstanding grand jury subpoenas shall be deemed withdrawn. Page 5 of 7 EFTA00233435

By signing this agreement, Epstein asserts and certifies that each of these terms is material to this agreement and is supported by independent consideration and that a breach of any one of these conditions allows the United States to elect to terminate the agreement and to investigate and prosecute Epstein and any other individual or entity for any and all federal offenses. By signing this agreement, Epstein asserts and certifies that he is aware of the fact that the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides that in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial. Epstein further is aware that Rule 48(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that the Court may dismiss an indictment, information, or complaint for unnecessary delay in presenting a charge to the Grand Jury, filing an information, or in bringing a defendant to trial. Epstein hereby requests that the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida defer such prosecution. Epstein agrees and consents that any delay from the date of this Agreement to the date of initiation of prosecution, as provided for in the terms expressed herein, shall be deemed to be a necessary delay at his own request, and he hereby waives any defense to such prosecution on the ground that such delay operated to deny him rights under Rule 48(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States to a speedy trial or to bar the prosecution by reason of the running of the statute of limitations for a period of months equal to the period between the signing of this agreement and the breach of this agreement as to those offenses that were the subject of the grand jury's investigation. Epstein further asserts and certifies that he understands that the Fifth Amendment and Rule 7(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provide that all felonies must be charged in an indictment presented to a grand jury. Epstein hereby agrees and consents that, if a prosecution against him is instituted for any offense that was the subject of the grand jury's investigation, it may be by way of an Information signed and filed by the United States Attorney, and hereby waives his right to be indicted by a grand jury as to any such offense. //I /// //I Page 6 of 7 EFTA00233436

By signing this agreement, Epstein asserts and certifies that the above has been read and explained to him. Epstein hereby states that he understands the conditions of this Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: By: Dated: 77a9-- Dated: Dated: ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY GERALD LEFCOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN LILLY ANN SANCHEZ, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN Page 7 of 7 it. EFTA00233437

By signing this agreement, Epstein asserts and certifies that the above has been read and explained to him. Epstein hereby states that he understands the conditions of this Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: By: ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY Dated: Dated: cif /9-410 7 Dated: JEFFREY EPSTEIN RAL LEFCO ESQ. 9 "... E.St OUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN LILLY ANN SANCHEZ, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN Page 7 of 7 EFTA00233438

By signing this agreement, Epstein asserts and certifies that the above has been road and explained to hint Epstein hereby states that ho understands the conditions of this Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: By: ASSISTANT U.S. Dated: JEFFREY EPSTEIN Dated: GERALD LEFCOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN Page 7 of 7 EFTA00233439

IN RE: INVESTIGATION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN ADDENDUM TO THE NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT l'I' APPEARING that the parties seek to clarify certain provisions of page 4, paragraph 7 of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (hereinafter "paragraph 7"), that agreement Is modified as follows: 7A. The United States has the right to assign to an independent third-party the responsibility for consulting with and, subject to the good faith approval of Epstein's counsel, selecting the attorney representative for the individuals identified under the Agreement. If the United States elects to assign this responsibility to an independent third-party, both the United States and Epstein retain the right to make good faith objections to the attorney representative suggested by the independent third-party prior to the final designation of the attorney representative. 71.1. The parties will jointly prepare a short written submission to the independent third-party regarding the role of the attorney representative and regarding Epstein's Agreement to pay such attorney representative his or her regular customary hourly rate for representing such victims subject to the provisions of paragraph C, infra. 7C. Pursuant to additional paragraph 7A, Epstein has agreed to pay the fees of the attorney representative selected by the independent third party. This provision, however, shall not obligate Epstein to pay the fees and costs of contested litigation filed against him. Thus, if after consideration of potential settlements, an attorney representative elects to file a contested lawsuit pursuant to 18 U.S.C. s 2255 or elects to pursue any other contested remedy, the paragraph 7 obligation of the Agreement to pay the costs of the attorney representative, as opposed to any statutory or other obligations to pay reasonable attorneys fees and costs such as those contained in s 2255 to bear the costs of the attorney representative, shall cease. EFTA00233440

By signing this Addendum, Epstein asserts and certifies that the above has been read and explained to him. Epstein hereby, states that he understands the clarifications to the Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. IL ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: By: ASSIST Y Dated: % ri g — Dated: Dated: GERALD LEFCOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN LILLY ANN SANCHEZ, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN EFTA00233441

By signing this Addendum, Epstein asserts and certifies that the above has been read and explained to him. Epstein hereby states that he understands the clarifications to the Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: By: 010 I AIN I U.J. A l l VI\Pill 1 Dated: Dated: Dated: RALD LEFCO RT ESQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN LILLY ANN SANCHEZ, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN EFTA00233442

1 By signing this Addendum, Epstein asserts and certifies that the above has been read and explained to him. Epstein hereby states that ho understands the clarifications to the Non- Prosecution Agreement and agrees to comply with them. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: By: ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY Dated: JEFFREY EPSTEIN Dated: GERALD LEFCOURT, ESQ. COUNSEL TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN Dated: itkaa" LILLY A ANCHEZ, ES ATTORNEY FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN EFTA00233443

U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida R ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY NLIVERY BY FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler White Burnett, PA 11Of II.;•.1.A.111 A. . Igh Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Ms. Sanchez: 99 N.E 4 Simi Mann* FL 33132 (305) 961-9I00 • Telephone O0O530-6444 • Facsimile December 19, 2007 I write to follow up on the December I41h meeting between defense counsel and the Eps prosecutors, as well as our First Assistant, the Miami FBI Special A ent in Charge and mysel . 2 Section 2255 provides that: tiny person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violation of [enumerated sections of Title I SI and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation .. . may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such person sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee." EFTA00233444

With this in mind, I have considered defense counsel arguments regarding the Section 2255 portions of the Agreement. As I previously observed, our intent has been to place the victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less. From our meeting, it appears that the defense agrees that this was the intent. During the course of negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Paragraphs 7 and 8, which as 1 wrote previously, appear far from simple to understand. 1 would thus propose that we solve our disagreements over interpretations by saying precisely what we mean, in a simple fashion. I would replace Paragraphs 7 and 8 with the following language: "Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title IS, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein been tried federally and convicted of an enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom it was prepared to name in an Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstein. Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less." 2 EFTA00233445

1 aIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIr alliIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN Sincerely, r/lify--J R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 3 EFTA00233446

IN RE: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. IN-HOUSE ARREST AND WORK RELEASE PROGRAMS DIVISION "W' CASES CRIMINAL DIVISION "W" AMENDED ORDER RE: IN-HOUSE ARREST AND WORK RELEASE The Sheriff of Palm Beach County is authorized to establish criteria for the consideration and review of inmates requesting the Work Release and In-House Arrest Programs while serving time in the Palm Beach County Detention Center or Stockade Caving been sentenced in this Division)Persons admitted to either program shall be at the sole discretion of the Sheriff and his staff in determining their suitability. The undersigned takes no position with respect to the eligibility of any inmate sentenced in this Division unless specifically stated at time of sentencing. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at west Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this the 11'" day of March, 2005, nunc pro tunc to February 1.7, 2005. • S;GNED AND DATED MAR I 1203 SANDRA K. McSORLEY Circuit Judge JUDGE SANDRA K. McS0RLE1 copies furnished: State Attorney for Division V". via Inter-office mall Public Defender for Division "W", via inter-office mall D/S E. Sobtino, EFTA00233447

Page 2 of 10 33 FL ADC 33-601.602 Rule 33-601.602, F.A.C. Fla. Admin. Code Ann. r. 33-601.602 C FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AN- NOTATED TITLE 33. DEPARTMENT OF CORREC- TIONS CHAPTER 33-601. CLASSIFICATION AND CENTRAL RECORDS Current with rules included in the January I I, 2007 issue of the Florida Administrative Weekly; see scope message for spe- cific rules in effect. 33-601.602. Community Release Programs. (I) Definitions. (a) Community Release — Any program which al- lows inmates to work at paid employment or parti- cipate in education, training, or substance abuse treatment programs in a work release center, con- tract community work release facility, or com- munity contract facility, or voluntarily work with a public or nonprofit agency in the community. (b) Work Release -- The portion of the community release program which allows inmates to work at paid employment in the community while continu- ing as inmates of the facility where they are con- fined. (c) Community Study Release — The portion of the community release program which allows inmates to attend an educational or vocational facility or participate in a training program in the community while continuing as inmates of the facility where they are confined. (d) Community Volunteer Service — An activity which allows inmates housed at a work release cen- ter or contract facility to voluntarily work with a governmental or nonprofit agency in the com- munity. (e) Modality II -- A community based residential substance abuse treatment program for inmates. Page (f) Net Earnings -- Gross pay less withholding tax, social security deductions, and any legally required court ordered civil deductions. (g) State Classification Office -- A staff member at the central office level who is responsible for the review of inmate classification decisions. Duties in- clude approving or rejecting Institutional Classific- ation Team (ICT) recommendations. (h) Work Release Center -- Refers to a facility where a community based transition program is conducted for approved community custody in- mates prior to release from custody. (i) Work Release Inmate Monitoring System (WRIMS) -- A web site application used by work release facility staff to record information related to an inmate's participation in community work re- lease. (2) Inmate Conduct While on Community Release. (a) During the inmate orientation process, which shall occur within three days of arrival at a com- munity work release center, inmates will be instruc- ted of the following conduct requirements. Upon completion of the orientation program, the inmate shall be given a Certificate of Orientation, Form DC6-126. Form DC6-126 is incorporated in subsec- tion (16) of this rule. 1. Directly and promptly proceed to and return from their destination using the approved method of transportation and route designated by the correc- tional officer major or facility director of a contract facility. 2. Remain within the area designated for their community release. 3. Return to the facility to which assigned at the scheduled time. 4. Return to the facility to which assigned imme- O 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. httn.//weh7. westlaw r.nm/nrint/nrintctream acrty9cv=Snlit&nrft=1-ITTAT.PRifrs= tnrafirm= Iinannnst EFTA00233448

Page 2 of 8 WShw. West's F.S.A. § 951.24 Page 1 C Effective:fSee Text Amendments) West's Florida Statutes Annotated Currentness Title XLVII. Criminal Procedure and Corrections (Chapters 900-999) (Refs & Annos) Chapter 951. County and Municipal Prisoners (Refs & Annos) 951.24. Extend the limits of confinement for county prisoners (1) Any county shall be deemed to have a work-release program upon the motion of that county's board of county commissioners which shall require the concurrence of the sheriff of the county. (2Xa) Whenever punishment by imprisonment in the county jail is prescribed, the sentencing court, in its discre- tion, may at any time during the sentence consider granting the privilege to the prisoner to leave the confines of the jail or county facility during necessary and reasonable hours, subject to the rules and regulations prescribed by the court, to work at paid employment, conduct his or her own business or profession, or participate in an educational or vocational training program, while continuing as an inmate of the county facility in which he or she shall be confined except during the period of his or her authorized release. (b) Any prisoner, at the time of sentencing or thereafter, may request the court in writing for the privilege of be- ing placed on the work-release program. The Department of Corrections, upon the request of the court, is author- ized to conduct such investigations as are necessary and to make recommendations to the court pertaining to the suitability of the plan for the prisoner and to supervise such prisoner if released under this program. Such a re- . lease may be granted by the court with the advice and consent of the sheriff and upon agreement by the prisoner. The court may withdraw the privilege at any time, with or without notice. (c) No person convicted of sexual battery pursuant to s. 794.011 is eligible for any work-release program or any other extension of the limits of confinement under this section. (3Xa) The wages or salary of prisoners employed under this program may be disbursed by the sheriff pursuant to court order for the following purposes in the order listed: 1. Board of the prisoner. 2. Necessary travel expense to and from work and other necessary incidental expenses of the prisoner. 3. Support of the prisoner's legal dependents. O 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. httn://web2.westlaw.com/nrint/nrintstream asnx?nrf1=1-1TMT .F.Rtifm=hlritRetRirlectirixtinn 11 nannnR EFTA00233449

Page 3 of 8 West's F.S.A. § 951.24 Page 2 4. Payment, either in full or ratable, of the prisoner's obligations acknowledged by him or her in writing or which have been reduced to judgment. 5. The balance to the prisoner upon discharge from his or her sentence, or until an order of the court is entered declaring that the prisoner has left lawful confinement, declaring that the balance remaining is forfeited, and dir- ecting the sheriff to deposit the funds in the general fund of the county to be spent for general purposes. (b) The sheriff may collect from a prisoner the wages or salary earned pursuant to this program. The sheriff shall deposit the same in a trust checking account and shall keep a ledger showing the status of the account of each prisoner. Such wages and salaries shall not be subject to garnishment in the hands of either the employer or the sheriff during the prisoner's sentence and shall be disbursed only as provided in this section. (c) Every prisoner gainfully employed is liable for the cost of his or her board in the jail as fixed by the county. The sheriff shall charge the prisoner's account, if he or she has one, for such board. If the prisoner is gainfully self-employed he or she shall deposit with the sheriff an amount determined by the court sufficient to accom- plish the provisions of subparagraphs (a)1.-5., in default of which his or her privileges under this section are automatically forfeited. (d) The board of county commissioners of any county may, upon the recommendation of the sheriff, authorize the person in charge of a county stockade or workcamp to implement paragraphs (a), (b), and (c), when such fa- cility is not directly under the sheriff. (4) Any prisoner who willfully fails to remain within the extended limits of his or her confinement or to return within the time prescribed to the place of confinement shall be deemed an escapee from custody and shall be subject to punishment as prescribed by law. (5) Exchange for the purpose of work-release of county prisoners among other counties of the state that have im- plemented work-release programs is hereby authorized, with the concurrence of the sheriffs of the involved counties. For the purpose of this subsection, upon exchange, the prisoner shall be deemed a prisoner of the county where confined unless or until he or she is removed from extended confinement status. Prisoners from other jurisdictions, serving lawful sentences, may also be received into a county work-release program as above provided. (6) In carrying out the purpose of this section, any board of county commissioners may provide in its annual budget for payment to the Department of Corrections out of funds collected from those being supervised such amounts as are agreed upon by the board and department to be reasonable and necessary. County judges are hereby authorized to levy SIO per month upon those supervised for purposes of paying for supervision under this act. CREDIT(S) A 1," EFTA00233450

II/25/2058 15:28 3553626 orketat I tsarina: STATE OF FLORIDA Plaintiff -Vs- JEFFREKL_Elagja Defendant IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY CASE NUMBER DIVISION DC NUMBER CIRCUIT NUMBER' 8026(13fl MCSORIAV "W" W351755 .15.4/JAIL MIT ORDER OF COMMUNITY CONTROL I This cause coming before the Court to be heard, and you, the defendant, being now present before the court, and you having CE) entered a plea of guilty to O entered a plea of nob contendere to Count I CI been found guilty bYjurY verdict of El been towae guilty by the court trying the cane without a jury of yROCUfl PERSON UNDER AcEnoRFROSTIToTiON SECTION 1: JUDGMENT OF GUILT O The court hereby adjudges you ro be guilty of the above oticase(s). Now, themfore, it is ordered and adjudged that %a imposition of sentence is he oby withheld and that you be placed on Probation I %r a period of under the supervision of the Department of Corrections, subject to Florida law. SECTION 2; ORDER WITIIHOLDING ADJUDICATION K Now. therefore, it is ordered and adjudged that the adjudication of guilt is hereby withheld and that you be placed on Probation for a period of_ nude- the supervision of the Department of Corrections, subject to Florida law. SECTION 3: INCARCERATION DURING PORTION OF SUPERVISION SENTENCE It in hereby ordered and adjudged that you be: committed to the Department of Corrections or confined In the County Jail fors term of with credit for jail time. After you hawserved of the term, you shall be placed on Probation for a period of under the supervision of the Department of Corrections, subject to Florida law. or • confined in the County Jail for a term of SIX (61 MONTHS A$ TO COUNI I vov-ovi@ I)Y TWELVE movn.q. COMMUNITY Calk% I coNsrortivm TO MI (12INION1MENTENCE IN CAS) g 2129EF00945AAMB with credit for 2( yA fl/DAY jail time, as a special cet:dlcion of supervision. Page 1 of8 Ifl3Iil3 1J'Aitift00 H3 V30 WM/3 )p 'N300 14 U0SVHS SS wd I -Inc 800Z 03-11J Form Revised 0211-08 EFTA00233451

11/ 25/ 2t388 15:28 3553626 esn.us t laCIPILPIFIL.' rreac. Oa 00 JEFFREY EP STEN CASEN502008CF009381AMMAR ins FURTHER ORDERED Out you eball comply with the following gist g‘imml.jtnligiiMtradsn as provided by ?loam law. (1) You will report to No probation office as directed. Not later than the fifth day of each month, unless othawisedimoted, you will • make it full and ttulhfal•rntort to your officer on the form provided for that purpose. (2) You nal pay the State ofFlorida the amount of S50.00 per month, as well as 4% surcharge, toward the, post of your supervision in accordance with 8: 948.09, unless otherwise exempted in compliance with Florida Stelae& (3) You will remain in a specified place. You will not change your residence or employment or have the county of your residence without first procuring th0000sent of your officer. • (4) You will not possess, carry or own any funtur or weapon, unless authorized by the court (5) You will live without :viokting the law. A conviction in a court of law shall not be necessary for such a violation to constitute a violation of your probetiorkommunity control. (6) Yon will not associate win any person engaged in any criminal activity. (7) You will not tees intoxiccats to excess or possess any drags or narcotics unless prmoribed by a physicist .Nor wfll.you visit , places whcrc intoxicants, drugs or other dangerous subsumes are emlaw/bIly sold, dispensed or used. (8) You will work diligently al a lawfal occupation, advise your employer of your probation stasis, and support any dependents to the best of your ability, as directed by your officer. (9) You will prompdy and trot/O211y answer all Inquiries directed to you by the court or the officer, and allow year officer to visit In. your home, at your employment site or elsewhere, and you will comply with all instructions your officer may give you; (10)You will pay resdrution, court costs, and/or fees in accordance with special conditions imposed or In accordance with the attached orders. • (I t)You will submit to random testing as directed by your officer or the professional staff of the treatment crew where he/she is receiving treatment ro determine the presence of alcohol or illegal drugs. You will be required to pay for the tests unless exempt by the court. (12)You will submit two biological specimens, as directed by your office?, for DNA analysis as prescribed in ss 943.325 and 948.014. F.S. (13)You will report in person within 72 hours of your release from incineration to the probation office in /ALM BEACH County, Florida, unless otherwise instructed by the taut or department. able condition applies orgy if section 3 on the previous page is checked,) Otherwise, you must report immediately to the probation officer located at $444 SOUTH CONGRUS AVENUE, ).Axe WORTH. FL 334614 Page 2 of 8 Form Revised 01.18-08 EFTA00233452

11/25/2008 15:28 3553626 elKt.LII I LICIMINAL STATE OF FLORIDA Plaintiff -vs- JEFFREY E. EPSTEM Defendant IN THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY CASE NUMBER DIVISION DC NUMBER CIRCUITNUMBER: zalitcavawanua DICSORLEY "VP" W3S755 15-4/JAL SPLIT ORDER OF COMMUNITY CONTROL I This cause coming before the Court to be beard, and you, the defendant, being now present before the court, end you having entered a plea of guilty to K entered a plea of nolo conteosere to K been found guilty by jury verdict cf K boon found sulky by the court eying the case without a jury of Count mem FERSON UNDER AGEO, 18 FOR FROSTITUTXON SECTION I: JUDGMENT OF GUILT CO The court hereby adjudges you to be guilty of the above offoose(s). Now, therefore, it is ordered and adjudged that the imposition of sentence h hereby withheld and that you be placed on Probation I for a period of under the supervision of the Depertivnt of Corrections, subject to Florida law. SECTION 2i ORDER WITHHOLDING ADJUDICATION • 0 Now, therefore, it is ordered and adjudged that the adjudication of guilt is hereby withheld and that you be placed on Probation bra period of_ tinder the supervision of the Department of Corrections, subject to Florida law. SECTION 3: INCARCERATION DURING PORTION OF SUPERVISION SENTENCE It is hereby ordered and achudgod that you be: O Ease 1 of 8 committed to the Department of Corrections or confined in the County Jail for a term of with credit for jail dew After you have served of the term, you shall be placed on Probation for a period of under the supervision of the Department ofCorreotions, subject to Florida law. or confined in the County flail fora tern of SIX (61 MONTHS AS TO COUNT I FOLLOWED DY TWELVE (121 MONTHS COMMUNITY CONTROL I_ONSECUTIVE TO TM (12/ MONTIISENTENCE EN CAStit 2D0SCFQ0945AAMB with credit for ONE (I) DAY jail time, as a special condition of weervision. 1VNI14180 imam inanoo HV3G tiny*, )18313 51309 1101WHs . GS :h Wel lz 0311$ Form Revised 03.11-08 EFTA00233453

II/25/2008 15:28 3553626 . . citecut UC1M1ran. rmiuc. STATE OF FLORIDA Plaintiff -vs- B. HMARE , D2JE Defendant C4SEN'UMBER DIVISION DCNUMBER CIRCUITNUMBER: IN Tits Firmarrat Amami CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR PALM BRACH COUNTY ' $02006'CR11091£IAE1QMI MCSORWAY "W" W35155 15-4/JATI. SPLIT ORDER OF COMMUNITY CONTROL I This cause coming before the C01111 to be heard, and you, the defendant, being now present before the Doti:110S you having CI entered a plea of guilty to 0 entered a plea of nolo conatudere to K K been found guilty by jury verdiot c( beca found guilty by the court trying the caw without a jury of Count L 7ROCUREXERSON UNDERAGE OF VI FOR PROSTITUTION SECTION 1: JUDGMENT OF GUILT (2/ The court hereby adjudges you to be guilty of the above otTente(s). Now, &reface, it is ordered and adjudged that die imposition of sentence is heroby withheld and that you be placed on Probation I for a period of under the supervision of the Dcparnwnt of Corrections, subject to Florida law. SECTION I; ORDER WITHROLDING ADJUDICATION K Now, therefbte, it is ordered and adjudged that the adjudication of guilt is hereby withheld sad that you be placed on Probation fore period of_ under the supervision of the Department of Corrections, subject to Florida law. SECTION 3: INCARCERATION DURING PORTION OF SUPERVISION SENTENCE it is hereby ordered and adjudged that you be: O committed to the Department of Corrections or O confined in the County Jail fore term of with credit for jail time. After you haves served of the term, you shall be placed on Probation far a period of under the supervision of the Department ofCorreetions, subject to Florida law. or confined in the County Jell fora term of pc (6) MONTHS AS TO COUNT 17OLLOWED BY TWELVE (12) MONTHS COMMUNITY CONTROL l_QQNSECUTIVE TO TRE (121MONTE.SENT'ENCE IN CASES ZOOSCF00945AAMB with credit for OhtE CO PAY Jail time, as a spacial condition of supervision. Page 1 of 8 TINIµIS0 imam lattinoo H3V3E1 itivd %rim 51308 1108VHS . SS WcI I Z 1Rf 9002 a311.~ Izorni Revised 03.15-03 EFTA00233454

11/25/20013 3553626 irate:1.0 s i2iatri.tereat. raisne ' JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASEti502008CF009381AXXXKE • SPECIAL CONDITIONS K 1. You mustundergo a Drag sad Alcohol evaluation and, if truculent is deemed nocarary, you must successfully complete the treatment, and be msportrible for the payment of any coats Mound while receiving add evaluation and treatment, unions. waived by the court. Additional instractiors ordered: K 2. You will make restitution to the following victim(s), as directed by the court, until the obligation is paid in MI: NAME: TOTAL. AMOUNT; $ Additional instructions ordered, including specific monthly amount, begin date, due date, orjoint & several: NAME: TOTAL AMOUNT: Additional instructions ordered, including specific monthly onoount, begin date, duo date, or joint do several: SPECIAL CONDMONS CONTINUED K 3. You will enter the Department of Corrections Non-Secure Drug Treatment Program or other residential treatment orogen &Probation and Restitution Center for a period of snout:taut completion es approved by your officer. You are to remain until you successfully complete sold Program and Abu-mare You arc to comply with all Rules and Regulations of the Program. You shall be confined in the county jail until pineemerti in said program, and if you are confuted in the jail, the Sheriff will transpon you to said program. K 4. You will abstain entirely rt' ain the use of alcohol and/or illegal drugs, end you will not associate with anyone who is illegally using drugs or consuming alcohol. K 5. You will submit to urinalysis, testing on a MOntbh• basis to determine the presence of alcohol or illegal drugs. You will be required to pay for the tests unless exempt by the court. K 6. You will not visit any establishment where the ministry business is the sale and dispensing of alcoholic beverages. O 7. You will successfully complete hours of community service at a rote of ate work site approved by your officer. Additional instructions ordered• 8. You will remain 31 your residencebetween 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. due to a curfew imposed, unless otherwise directed by the Court. O 9. You will submit to electronic monitoring, follow the rules of electronic monitoring, and pay per month for the cost of the monitoring service, unless otherwise directed by the court 10. You will not associate with during the period of supervision. You will have no ccntrect (direct or indirect) with the victim or the victim's family during the pericd of supervision. 12. You will have rto contact (direct or indirect) with during the period of supervision. 13. You will moinuin full thno employment or unend school/vocational school full time or a combination of school/work during the term of your supervision. 14. You will make a good faith effort toward completing basics or funotional literacy sIdlla or a high school equivalency diploma. K IS. You will successfully complete the Probation & Restimtion Program, abiding by all rules and regulations. K Page 3 of 8 Form Revised 01.18.08 EFTA00233455

JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE#502008CF0091BIA=MB K 16. You will attend Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous meetings at least monthly, u olosa otherwise directed by the court. K 17. You must sucerss • tinily complete Auter Manazement, and be responsible for the payment of any coats incurred while receiving said treatment, unless waived, II convicted of a Domestic Violence offense, as defined in s. 741.28, F.S., you, must attend and successfully complete a batteree a intervention program, unless otherwise directed by the court Additional instrucnoas ordered: O 18. You will attend an HIV/AIDS Awareness Pierian) consisting of a class of not leas than two (2) hours or more than four (4) hours in length, the coat far which will be paid by you. O 19. You shall submit your parson, property, place of residence, vehicle or personal effects to a warrantless search at any time, by any probation or eonununity control offices or any law enforcement officer. 20. DEFENDANT MUST REGISTER AS A SEXUAL OFFENDER WHIN 48 HOURS OF RELEASE 21. AS A SPECIALCONDITION OF HIS COMMUNITY CONTROL,TFIE DEFENDANT IS TO HAVE NO UNSUPERVISED CONTACT WITH' LNORS, AND THE SUPERVISING ADULT MUST BE APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 22. THE DEFENDANT IS DESIGNATED AS A SEXUAL OFFENDER PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 943.05 AND MUST ABIDE WY ALL THE CORRESPONDING REQUIREMENTS or THE STATUTE, A COPY OF WHICH IS ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN 23. DEPENDANT HEST PROVIDE A DNA SAMPLE IN COURT AT THE TIME OF THIS PLEA. El 24. SPECIFIED CONTACT WITH THE PAROLE AND PROBATION OFFICER El 25. CONFINEMENT TO AN AGREED-UPON RESIDENCE DURING HOURS AWAY FROM EMPLOYMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES 25. MANDATORY PUBLIC SERVICE • 26. SUPERVISION, BY THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS BY MEANS OF AN ELECTRONIC MONITORING DEVICE OR SYSTEM • 27, ELECTRONIC MONITORING 24 norms PER DAY ▪ 28. CONFINEMENT TO A DESIGNATED RESIDENCE DURING DESIGNATED HOURS AND, IF PLACED ON DRUG OFFENDER PROBATION, YOU WILL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION OF SUPERVISION iN ADD:TION TO TILE STANDARD CONDITIONS LISTED ABOVE AND ANY OTHER SPECIAL CONDITIONS ORDERED BY THE COURT: (14)Y ou will participate in a specialized drug treatment program, either as an in-patient or out patimt, as recommended by the treatment provider. You trill attend all counseling sessions, submit to random urinalysis end, if an inpatient, you will comply with all operating rules, regulations and procedures of the teetmr.nt facility. You will pay for all costs associated with treatment and testing unless otherwilo directed. Additional instuctIons ordered: (15) You will =nein nt your residence between p.m, and a.m. duo to a curfew imposed, unless otherwise directed by the court. AND, IF PLACED ON COMMUNITY CONTROL YOU WILL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDMONS, IN ADDITION TO THE STANDARD CONDITIONS LISTED ABOVE AND ANY OTHER SPECIAL CONDITIONS ORDERED BY THE COURT: Page4 of 8 Form Revised 0343-08 EFTA00233456

11725/28E8 15;28 3553626 tam-rutt UK mL am. _ -cure ravan JEFFREY EPS Inihr CASES50200BCF009381AXXXhill • (14)V u will roped to your officer as directed, at least:one time a week, unless you have written consent otherwise. • (15)You will remain confuted to your approved residence except for one half how before and after your approved Grafts:int; public service work, or any other special activities approved by your officer. • .(16)You will maintain an hourly accounting of dl your activities on a daily log, which you will submit to your offices' on request. (17) You will successfully complete bouts of community service at a Tat of at a work site approved by your . offica. Additional instructions ordered: (18) You will submit to electronic monitoring, follow the rules of oleetronio monitoring, and pay S per month K for the cost of the monitoring service, tudem otherwise directed by the court. AND, IF PLACED ON PROBATION OR COMMUNITY cotIrtkoL FOR A 87.2f QUENSE PROVIDED IN CHAPTER 704, s. 800.04, s. 827.071, or s.847,0145, comvirrrED ON ORAZULSSUB r 1y S YOU WILL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING STANDARD SEX OFFENDER CONDITIONS, IN ADDITION TO TEIE STANDARD CONDITIONS LISTED ABOVE AND ANY OTHER SPECIAL. CONDITIONS ORDERED BY Tilt COURT: (14)A mandatory curfew from. 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. The court may designate another 8-hour period if the offender's employment precludes the above specified time, and the alternative is recommended by the Depanment of Corrections. If the court determiner that imposing a curfew would endanger the victim, the court may consider alternative senetians. (15)1f the viotim was under the age of 18, a prohibition on living within 1,000 feet of a school, day care center, park. playground, or other place where children regularly congregate, as prescribed by the court. The 1,000-foot distance shall be measured in a serldat line from the effendi-ea place of residence to the nearest boundary line of the school, day care center, park, playground, or other piece where childrencongregate. The distance may not be measured by a pedestrian route or automobile route. (16) Active purticipation in and successful completion of a sex offender treemzot program with qualified practitioners specifically trained to treat sex offenders, at the offender's own esperse. If s qualified practitioner is net available within a 50.mile radius of the offender's residence, the offender shall participate in other appropriate therapy. (17)A prohibition on any contact with the victim, directly or indirectly, including through a third person, unless approved by the victim, the offender's therapist, and the sentencing court. (18)11 the victim was under the age of 18, a prohibition on contact with a child under the age of IS except as provided in this paragraph. The court may approve supervised contact with a child under the age of 18 if the approval is based upon a recommendation for contact isaued by a qualified practitioner who is basing the recommendetion on a risk es testment. Further, the sex offender must be currently enrolled in or have successfidly completed a sex offender therapy program. court may not grant supervised cement with a child if the contact is not recommended by a qualL5e4 practitioner and may deny supervised contact with a child at any time, (19)11 the victim woe under ego 18, a prohibition on working for pay or 85 a volunteer at any places where children regularly congregate, including, but not limited to nay school, daycare center, park, playground, pet store, library, zoo, theme par's, or mall. (20)Unless otherwiee indicated in the treatment plan provided by the sexual offender treatment program, a prohibition on viawing, accessing, owning, or potateaing any obscene, pornographic, or sexually stimulating visual or auditory material, including telephone, electronic media, computer programa, or computer services that arc relevant to the offender's deviant behavior pattern. (21)A requirement that the offender submit two specimens of blood or other approved biological specimens to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to be registered with the DNA data bat (22)A requirement that thc offender make restitution TO the victim, as ordered by the court under s. 775.089 for all necessary medical and rotated professional services relating to physical, psychiatric, and psychological cart. (23)Submission to a warrantless search by the community control or probation officer of this offender's person, residence, or vehicle. Page 5 of 8 Form Revised 03.18-0S EFTA00233457

ski tor soots so: so 30;a0040 JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASE1502008CF009381A=MB • EFFECTIVE FOR PROBATIONER OR COMMUNITY CONTROLLER WHOSE CRIME WAS COMMITTED ON OR . .. . .,. ..., .. . " .." • A • • . • AFTER OCTOBER 1 199,7,AND WIR) ISILACED ON COMMUNITY CONTROL OR SEX ormozik PROBATIQR ' - FOR A VIOLATWN OF CHAPTER 2a 4. $00.04, (4.1;21:071., ore. 547.0145, IN ADDITION TO ANY OTHER,PROVISION • • • .. • - ' OF THIS SECTION, YOU MUST COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OP SUPERyISIONI. ... • " • . •• . ..„ . •, -. •• . t* . •. . (24)As part of a treatment program, panieipalMn at least simusily in polygraph °nomination° to obtain information necessary tovi*.. . management and treatment end to reduce the seloffender's denial mechanisms. A polygraph examinationniust be conducted * I . " . .. ' polygraphier trained specifically in the use of the polygraph for the monitoring of sex offenders, where avilleble, and shall be•paiel . by the sex offender. (25)Maintenance of a drivinglog and a prohibition against driving a moor vehicle alone without the prior approval of the supervising officer. . . (26)A prohibition analog obtaining or using a post office box without the prior approval of the supervising officer. (27)1f theft was sexual contact, • submission to, at the offender's expense, an HIV teat with this'll:sults to byreleased to the victim . . . . ard/or daviethn'a ?Meat a guardian ,. . . .. (28)Eleetronio monitoring when deemed necessary by the probation officer end supervisor, and ordered by the court at die . . . recommendadon of the Department of Corrections, (29) Effective for an offender whose crime was committed on.or after July 1, 2805, and who are placed on supervision for violation of chapter 794,1.800.04, s. 827.071, or a. 847.0145, a prohibition on accessing the Internet or other computer services until tho offender's sex offender treatment program, after a risk asr.ssment is completed, approves and implements a safety plan for the offender's Beaming or using the Internet or other computer services. (30)Effective for offenders whose crime was committed on or after September 1, 2005, them is }tetchy imposed, in addition to any other provision in this =lion, mandatory ekctronk monitoring as a condition of supervision for those who: .• Are placed on supervision for a violation of chapter 794, s. 800.04(4), (5), or (6), s. 827.071. ors, 847.0145 and the unlawful sexual activity involved a victim 15 years of age or younger and the offender is 18 years of age or older, or " Are designated as a sexual predator pursuant to a 77511; or • lies previously been oonviotod o f a violation of chapter 794, s. 800.04(4), (5), or (6), s. 827.071, or a. 847,0145 and the unlawful sexual activity involved a victim 15 years of age or younger and the offender is 18 years of age or older. You are hereby placed on notice that should you violate your probation or community control, and the conditions set forth In a. 948.063(1) or (2) are satisfied, whether your probation or community control is revoked or not revoked, you shell be placed on electronic monitoring in aceordsnoe with F.S. 948.063. • • YOU ARE HEREBY PLACED ON NOTICE that the court may at any time rescind or modify any of the conditions of youi probation, or may extend the period ofprobatlon as authorized bylaw, of may discharge you from thriller supervision, If you violate any of the conditions of your probation, you may be arrested and the court may revoke your probation, adjudicate you guilty if .• adjudication of guilt was withheld, and impose any sentence that it might ban imposed before placing you on proba0on-or require you to serve the balance of the sentence. Page 6 of S Form Revised 03-IS-OS EFTA00233458

11? Zb/ .1S7 itieb . . . . . . _ USINLUS I 1.41.1.P1LIVIL JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASENS02008CPOOMIAXMOvi.B • ISTDRTFIEE. ORDERED that when you hero beeitimmacted si to.the conditions of probation you than be released from • custody if you are in custody; and it you are atitbeity jm bond, the sureties thereon shall stand discharged from liability. (This peravaph applies only if section I or section 2 is checked.) • . . . ' • IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the oleic of this court file this order in the clerk's office and provide cerdfiCd copies of sin* the officer for use in compliance with the requirements of law. DONE AND ORDERED, on /47V tY Nuric PRO TUNC RfailLbZial Sandra K. hicSorlay, Chat dge Date I acknowledge receipt of a copy of this order and that the conditions have b Mimed to me and I agree to abide by them. . Instructed by: ep/074248 Supervising Offing Defendant Page 7 of8 Porto Revisal 03.18-08 EFTA00233459

£31£ apo.ioso • luess.;01a1—:a.En.l.nera: • %ace Via • ; 2.00 LE 365.00 O 3 3.00 O 3 1,00 K 540.00 K s E) sag/ K Othr: O Other. • • el • JEFFREY EPSTEIN CASEN502008CF009381AXXX.MB ... COURT ORDERED PAYMENTS CHECK ALL TWAT ARE ORDERED:. .. .. .. . : • . -• • • EMU O s___ Total of Bunn:sated in untonce, pranott to 8.775.083 (1)(s) through (g) or Clunk: 316, FS. O 3_, Statutorily mandated 5% surchergc/cost Irina osessed (on first Km) pursuant to s. 938.04, FS, . O 12,59 Crime Stoppers Trust Fund purulent to 3. 938 06(I) F S Stank:11v mandated ifs fine itintorned MANDATORY COST73 IN AM. CASES 12) 000,09 Additional court con for felony offense, pursuant to I. 938,05(iXA), ES. O L.50.09 Addition) court cost for mledtmea Dor or criminal traffic offenta, pursuant to s. 938.05(1)(10 or (c), F.S. O ; 50.00 . Crimes Componeation Trost Fund pursuant tos. 938.03(l), P.S. IS ; 50.09 County Crime Preventko Fund pursuant to s. 775,083(2), F.S. (33) ; 3.09 Additional Coon Casts Clearing Trost Fund pursuant to a. 938.01(1), F.S. O $ Z.00 Per month for each month of suporvIsion for Training Trust Fund Surcharge, pursuant to s. 948.09. P.S. kkhflighlf,2$12)2/aa.~ECIFIC TYPF-c OF CASES O 061.09 Rape Crids Program Trutt Fund, pursuant to I. 938.085, PS. for any violations of ns 784.011, 784.021, 784.034843341; . • 784.045, 784,048,764.07, 784.08, 784.081,784.082,784.083,784.085, or 794.011, P.S. O 5201.09 Domestk %names Trust Fund, pursuant to s. 938.05, FS. for any violations of as. 784.01/, 784.021, 784.01, 784.041, 784.045, 784.048, 784.07, 784.08, 784.081, 784.082,784.083,784.085, 794.011, many offense of Dornosdo Violence datorked Ins. • O ;IN 00 Ctrraln Crimu Against Minors, pursuant to e. 938.10(1), ES. for any violations of a. 784.085, chopta 787, chapter 794. s. 796.03, a. 80064, chapter 827, s. 847.0145, ore. 985.701, F.S. • O 5135.00 DUI Court Ceps, pursuant toe. 93&07, F.S. for any violation of as. 316.193 of 327.35,F-3. O 3,09 State Amoy Law Enforcement RadioSystem Trod Fund, pursuent to s.318.18(17), F.S, for any violations of oilcans listed Ina 318.17 induding x.316.1935, 316.027, 316.061, 877.111, chunk: 891, as. 316,193,316.192, 316.067, 316.072(3), 316.5450), or sny other Dittnee in chapter 316 wbtoh is classified 19 a criminal violation. MANDATORY COURT COSTS A UTHORIZED 13Y LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES Criminal Joint Education by Municipalities and Counties, pursuant ton. 938.1$, F.S. Additional Court cons for loon) requtrtments and other county funded programs pursuant to 1.939.183(1)(a), FS. Tan Court panuent to s. 938.19(2), F.S. DISCRETIONARY Per month during iba cum of not-video to the following norm Ton I organ leaden established for the solo purposo of supplomenting rehebilltalvn emu of the Depmtman of Como:Int& pursuant so e. 948.039(2), P.S.: Public Defender Application Ft; if not previously collemod unitised, punuarg to I. 27.52 and a. 938.29, F.S. Public Defender Fen and Costs, inforturd to t. 938,29, F.S. as determined locally. Prosecution/Investigative Costs, pursuant to I. 938.27, F.S. DISCRETIONARY COSTS FOR §PRCIFIC TYPES OF CA9A,9 0 Ma County Aleohd and Other Drug Abuse Trutt Fun d, nutmeat tot. 938.21 and e.938.23, F.S. for vlohdont of a. 316,193, s.856.01 I, s. 856.015, or chopier 562, chapter 367, or chapter 568. F.S. CD saw operating Trutt Fond of the FDLE, pursuant to 3.938.25, F.S. for violations of a, 893.13 ofensa * TOTALS 473.00 PAYMENT IS TO BE MADE THRODCH AND PAYABLE TO: 0 Department of Corrections or 0 Clan of Coun (If collected by the Depertment of Corrections, a manhunt of 4% will bo added to all pigments ordcrcd by the court, pursuant to s. 94531. P.S.) Court Cosu/Finos Weivcd Coon Cosu/Finos in the amount of convened to community service hours Coun Costs/Flocs in the amount of reduced to civil judgment. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR PAYMENT: Page 8 of8 Form Revised 03-18-08 EFTA00233460

• •1 ',7r 1- 'i4 _41il s... .. .....„,..:;.. .44.. ..... ' t ;e1,4S:c: 1: ' .- c- : . .W :: - .7 ' 41446. ‘:Aw. 114....71rt: • . . 111, • . .; • !: 14 ' or . .:: .......:4L . ; . 'WeLFW-;T;ruurriet4Fegkir4. ST . . • ,, FELOMY OMER To c 1 , ea 2 365' 13OWD* -}1.; It fiessrittplow. • 7314 VS. • ' %Matt:it/ . Erisy•Ent • ;Airs.- . . - . " - r ••• • • . • - • • . • • • • • • . TYPE a e,.. coo •tyy. • J.) • % ,,kiter.dr) • . .. . ..li Lti I J e : - Cxt.tRep. A._ . -Pres of W I VIO .. ef. Co. Pros. efote the diet f rrail t recillt-ettee** lit e p . , . .. 4Artteci po anied •O With Without Prejudic t 0 ithdrawn 0 ourgReserves Rulin 0 Written Order to Rollout Warrant t' 0' Ordered 0 *ecalled 0 Bo a t I 0 Seeliieliw • • Olds4 Covets - Ogg Ciand 0•BondForf .1 GOR:bisai A cp. Boa Pod Vacated :0 trthious /Reinstated Mond Reinstated, if dsman a 0 5 te OS0R:Disch/Reya*Reinstated . • • . to file clad* OVieleased O,12. /SD& 0 Deft Indigent, 0 PD Appt 0 Big only' PD NES I • " - 0; COuioAppti • . • ' _ aluation for a Ding Pant 0 DOCNen-Sec ' Bed by i • " • ' 0 Prealea 0 pS1 °Oared by/w• • • days k p. vitinputiroXaDJJA/ 'pairing . ...' . Referred to: Fri / SAAPJ PACED - ID Case p don thc•absentee dockbt . ; • . l att. • .. • Fn ENTERP3. A OP ChillgSd -Cra /- 0 - NOT t3UILTY GUILTY a NO . 0 . BEST Otto • ;Sup .* ' ' j. 7 dv of Rt.& t • • WaivedPSI 0 Cw.. , . • Charge • ' §v48clbsi JCUli.T'Y.as Charged to 011A a Leask . • WATT arebarged as tt Cts • • . , - WIELD as to Cts • I • • • • • 0 WI ELD , . as to Ctie •••• ••••!4 : - POUND ANDADIUDICAIIED DENT alto - te • - • . " • • 0- PO M P e l .t1UT 0 14 2 7 be Ca i . ...— P 1 4 011.e_Pr21... t -::: / .& ... ... — -0 ;;1410 10:., ?Fob /lCoinin Control: 0 4s:oltal • : Stip/P01111d: (violen)qabit iml Ole 8ENII1ENCE: PBCJete • /PC4,5 ci Reinstate 775.084 ar. I. Iii hiotrafied 4 0 isr:M. ou : u ffs Sceessfully / !Unsu 8'.. ual Predator • Or ' • • PBCP • ( • / • • Cts) • .' In 4 tW/Credit for 1 . • . i ... • Dad:Ma:minded deft toxernain •OUSEL= / Comet t Coasrm illatsel • ., ! • -onc j Execution of Sentence Stiied 0 Sentence 3 Mine seavalas to Cts 0 0 HabiMA Oft Min IMand: as ttJ Cts , . ' to.: YOuthibl Off T ABOWISFNIENCBTDOPOL—OWEDByi DRIVERS LICENSE BE 1USPRNDED ;.°1 0 / • titKElD 0 -fl /sex FOR " ?rob YBARS, CI Comm Control AfrA RBSIIII .4.1 /2 . •: Lb•011c 9.l)7143 . • . • . . • ... • r . .• , . ' • . Set AReinain S .. Reset • • . •• - . • Div • • s Set / Remains Se Reset . . • , - • Div • at ,Ahl/PM 0 Deft sign • • . .• 1t . • t • ' • Def 0 A A tzi Bandsman 0 rq,Prob Co . . • • : . • • / • • ? O. Jail 0 DJ' O. p County Courthouse 18.05 N. Dixie, West Palm Beach b/citified by • 0 Courtro P844 St4e!Road aq by: i Criminal ..,. Justice B 80, Belle Mak on . . . .. 0. :.•• 0 CourirooracCri ' tree Complex. I. 3228. Gun Club 68t Piliii.Beach )460U OERTAIN WESTFALta ARE S PERSON WITH A =AMITY WHO HEEDgNNY ASSISTANCE Fla% CONTACT NARY JOVE, BEACH, FL 33401; TELtiNANE ($61) 3t5-4380, accataliconcem ORDER TO PAMSATO ADs. COORDINATOR IN TIC mmilTMATWE WHIN? 'NORMA DAYS OF TINA RECEIPT WINS FACCEEDDEOWARE ENTITLED, Etta COST TO NOWTOTHCFACMSIONX/E., - . OFFICE OF THE tCIJRT, PAPJABEACH COUNTY COINTMOUSE, 205:k SCE Weal! ESA . CFI/DS NOTICEFWOO ARE HEARING GRIME RIMMED, 99-15,05.8771. • • il i I S EFTA00233461

; • • • • 200SCS00938120Z PERSON UNDER `SS3t4i sr- • • -•• • ,:•. :SlEPS r Itidge- • "3.; xp;t;,' -: • ' ":46Liciati ) • • • • :1-4,•••... • !." / 1 - lee ' . . • • lN i - sr • • c u ink Nik/ .Q:41,f2. :'. • '•'• '''' ;LV.k •:.:.3t...., . 1Dei lailitapiki. I — . ..../.• • • ,,. ..s.: ,:47.•,::::::•.. , t; — • . ..,. f - • .,, - . .. . . - . .. . .0., . - .plitct • . / !tlictuv. i.s. • , 1 - • • 14 V. 4.441i* .(.1" fre>. • • . • ..,,,s, 'IliOtabag$ 't--.c .il'• - 4 s.- - ' -. "CSAY014. 'r Th liri ti:Scit€4' ' . . Mi$14.4551irifriMOir:4; 0 .. Waktevolted•Rdsiniteled • - ... '•!.. ..,. . .. ii to ' Sid, if Bo' :.:13:ttraiiez " •• 1 Sa: .. . ; • r.,449.1trA-S4 1155,40ti 11060,0ii.. ' ,., ill :1190404gitielfgje : 12 • - • ".:ti•••;:a.:.*:4;..:•C:.2.,.. :jr•••• . : . : • , • -. • ..„. *tit ,..• . 1 feit -, .. . T.- t4i,l'erfe.ceStblM*61 411--17, - *11.04fre!M44 4 MStefairn -:!--.• , tiffigif " . t.urca doki —mAtieeta b t't • - • via).... • ...if. •,.3„).'•<:•: '.:(...;1.‘„,.....1401.;•?‘ ..;:....::.;:ct•;.• -.- AVM 0.0taPt.-.... . .1 • . . ihrotEts• ji•srt.:, ' ' 46;L:.,...4simcg ,... . • 0). lANDS 64tiotiLks.tddi: • • .. . . , . .. . . ' ' ,ii*O4te11111y5Pts ., . . • 7` - ...". .>* "^ ts•-••,"••-,,.fa!4•-• 4 4-4.-,..:. 7 OISP9404 1141,11TPIPPP :MaACIS;\:' IGAtigaiSSititlatt kb. , - i~ -per . • .' Itl .' ' AQIC": . rg*ia,jMrlk•Er0tati : 7 . 4stAr inicsowmcmk.ed. .1 • - • 4011;16;11,00.' 44 t9p,i- ta r ?* Si • . cu. 0;*eAtiteAse atayeo gapretotekooptoAwrogitisiepj. Y.ciiihlitiatriagebititti# . • , , .. • , . 1"7;(40 4re ;ace* 1400, 1.4 • . . •• a •-•• r r: • • ' • , . T • • • .• -4:-L-:44-ra . • / CE-Couctoloichketittliiiiffiistiot *.C•4101-613-arriF4‘4.4:;•-: ::::104**ifacx101 0;:t .elle-thadfret:t. ••::0•32:2$01iti:tiub-Wd;:.'ittreratitrof. .• • • ...• ••latif .. . 13iitittiaH. .**icaigii-wAiiiibctiAtiiptoinbajttaidintini. OrktAisttinits- pRocuonia: • : • 4:ento • cotimits.warebacoce timitaimsobligismopit oraceoolitcquirrP.mliso- . • c011enPUSLICOLDOE1hViral SaSk:•'' 1000.4*4 14iigl- 01)3$5:0KWITHO.1214. 91MODFPritalgf#11PrOFtlitSNOTCEIF YoU ARE HEAStiOety0ICEIMPAIRED;CALC14(0458417t " •" . . • *1. fad?! q!'!.10rist•31Q2 '. • -tr • EFTA00233462

: DATE: age' 2 • .ryn sTAa Prob./ cr-- n /.... . O Sex Off/ Drug Cohaec. wt" . . . oti Ko C.C. i c.c. II: __,Ja,.._‘4tio 14-as4{pfs- ..i41-i . — • • • • - • : .. ....- • , .. .,.. • • O—Pn5batloritrgnSferredle:“ • "•• .. - • - . ..: • SPEDIAL CI .Q.cimplete.OtiginalIy .Q 0urfevic Q • Deft;lo P- Deft. n 'O Deft. to 0 Restitution -cr-sutwrtcyairydra- CONDITIONS:, ' . Ordered Conditione . • ' . . . • . p.m., with•the-fefiewing exception. .- • • . .• :. _ fepOrt toPreb.. Dept. immediately upon-release. i ' . .. t p have in care, custody; or control any.t.iniawfulerillaopl.rnalgrial, subst., device, oriobject. i mecilato notify Prob..Officer if place of residence-brit& changes. • , ....: CI3,O filed ' . . . .., • . . • ' • • : kreRigoti • O A tan • ;.... 6 O NoConeumptioNPossession CI Attend 'CI Deft.liot,te e ,use Eva]. / Pay.choligiCaleital: 4 .. 4.„ . 1400,6 -: .upigthiVii,jitnv.Alf of • .• . .AA and/or rIzs:yctio, xuarcval. within / by' • - -,•-•-te7 • , ,. .. • 0. „, : .. ...Pult, • •---.- ::;-'•••••-•,. 7.7 1/ 1Cd'ettl' IN - mr' 1 • -:' • Lialfigat.;$0,1A-6•::...7.4:P'Cibadtp‘wit;&.F...:.:•.:-,•?-4,-.y. ...:::,.47 Alcohol or .Drugs or. Intoxicants without a Prescription. • : • .•''''. .. ; ' . NA Meetings per. Week: . . • • • • ' ••••••;m5..frif•A 9f business whose. primary purpose is the sale of alcohol, ,i•kt. •••A, • •-e • '. frequent any•Pace Complete ••' Cotkimuility 0 lisiwataft:igeOstel•Lauftl*Dclgiii2f O - 4#44diiiiti-succeasitiqy.complete-EXE4c;i'ia-plivid.11-ses-sioratatliiiiitipact Service to be- one at the rate of :__• __!.EIrs..per'WrtMe.(Miniy . . ..,...., • - . • .. : Iraq I.Ef. • • - • ' .• • ' ''' ... . .. , . : ............,• eaniaci_ . : .•••• •,.._ .. Ntialitact / No Violent Contact/ No. Direct erinclirect contactv/ViPtiM(s),er..otherafltg:>`: •• •-• -'• . ., ,. . .pontS sofinoiChilelien litrervIsiortrt ,I2bEifter-a• ' SucceSsfully:Complete-DOC O. Hold1)10UStody, O :Enter-and Successfully D .fforfelt-Weapon wlowNclit upery Ion:aware of thilcrisinitid the disphaitions• .. • • ir "' beir.trib O Waived by Court. . Nbn- ureaad-ProgramanclAny,Recomniended•Afterlark; . . release only.ip DOC Non-S'ibureted prograrri Officer. . . • .-._zi •. • dorriplate•RBSOLong i Short:Pack Drug Perin and-Any ReciAftercaret,4 1 / MOney•seized at the bile : e of attest to: . • . . ••••ste; . - . . •• . • . . . • O:Entqrandtomplete: O Anger ' • S. Theft Abatement Program: .O Defendant May apply fer.EarlyTerinination 'CI Beive • ' ,* • days / ‘ Management:Program • O Betterers Interv.entiiri,Pirigrarn .I.*. • - ‘ ".. .. • • . O Other . . , . . . . • • after ) , provided. ail conds.. are satisfied. . month in.? C iivittrore.dlt for . . •days /months.' . • 4 • • 41/ • ii.y I. onoinf. • S. . few 5 ii . • e (vitt_ .0 Q. .4.0 . ---14 • 9 4•0;1/4:4,se . . . .. : ... tf•RS. O I' 1-)Sik. 0 : • .. . • 0 . . - - .. . . • • • . . • . • • • . . . .- • - . . • . .. . .. . . • .. • • • .. . O • MINS WO •••••911.01 EFTA00233463

Case 9:08-ov-80736-KAM Document 26 Entered on FLED Docket 08/21/2008 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRAJJOHNSON N RE: JANE DOES 1 AND 2, Petitioners. ORDER TO COMPEL PRODUCTION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the Petitioners' ore tenus motion seeking the production of the Non-Prosecution Agreement between the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO") and Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"). After consideration of the Motion, the arguments of the parties, and the record, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Petitioners' Motion is GRANTED. The USAO shall produce the Non-Prosecution Agreement, including any modifications and addenda thereto, in accordance with the following procedures: (a) The USAO shall produce a copy of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, including any modifications and addenda thereto (collectively referred to as the "Agreement"), to the attorneys for Petitioners. (b) Petitioners and their attorneys shall not disclose the Agreement or its terms to any third party, absent further court order, following notice to and an opportunity for Epstein's counsel to be heard. (c) Before counsel for petitioners show the Agreement to their clients or discuss the specific terms with them, they must provide a copy of this Order to petitioners, who must review and acknowledge their receipt of, and agreement to abide by, the terms of the Order. Counsel for petitioners must promptly provide a copy of that acknowledgment to the USAO. (d) If any individuals who have been identified by the USAO as victims of EFTA00233464

Lase 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/2112008 Page 2 of 2 Epstein and/or any attomey(s) for those individuals request the opportunity to review the Agreement, then the USAO shall produce the Agreement to those individuals, so long as those individuals also agree that they shall not disclose the Agreement or its terms to any third party absent further court order, following notice to and an opportunity for Epstein's counsel to be heard (e) Prior to producing the documents to any other individuals who have been identified by the USAO as victims of Epstein and/or any attomey(s) for those individuals, a copy of this Order must be provided to said individuals, who must review and acknowledge their receipt of, and agreement to abide by, the terms of this Order. Counsel for petitioners must promptly provide a copy of that acknowledgment to the USAO. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, this 211' day of August, 2008. /en KENNETH A. MARRA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies furnished to: all counsel of record By signing below, I certify that I have reviewed and agree to be bound by the terms of this Order. Dated: 1 I 6. Signed by. Printed Name: 2 EFTA00233465

n LEOPOLD-KUVINA CONSUMER JUSTICE ATTORNEYS July 6, 2009 Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of Florida 500 E. Broward Blvd, 7th Floor Ft. Lauderdale. FL 33394 Re: B.B. JEFFREY EPSTEIN OUR FILE NO.: 080303 Dear Ms. Villafana: As you are aware, this firm represents Plaintiff, Jane Doe, a/k/a/ B.B. in the civil litigation against Jeffrey Epstein styled B.B. I Jeffrey Epstein. case no.: 502008CA037319 MB AB. We are hereby requesting that a copy of the non-prosecution agreement be provided to my office as soon as possible. If there are any questions or concerns regarding the production of this agreement, please contact me at once. Sperely, 4 111ENC VIN STK/mlb CRASHWORTIIINESS • MANAGED CARE ABUSE • CONSUMER CLASS ACTIONS • PERSONAL INJURY • WRONGFUL DEATH EFTA00233466

11.7.211=157-, .D E p EQ. LEOPOLD-KUVIN. CONSUMER JUSTICE ATTORNEYS July 31, 2009 Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of Florida 500 E. Broward Blvd, 7th Floor Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33394 Re: B.B. I. JEFFREY EPSTEIN OUR FILE NO.: 080303 Dear Ms. Villafana: I am following up on my letter of July 6, 2009, regarding the non-prosecution agreement between the U.S. Attorneys office and Jeffrey Epstein. Please advise whether or not this document will be produced. STIUmlb CRASHWORTHINESS • MANAGED CARE ABUSE • CONSUMER CLASS ACTIONS PERSONAL INJURY WRONGFUL DEATH EFTA00233467

U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida 500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 Facsimile: (56!) 820-8777 August 4, 2009 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Spencer T. Kuvin, Esq. Leopold—Kuvin, P.A. Re: Jeffrey Epstein/B.B. — Requested Disclosure of Non-Prosecution Agreement Dear Mr. Kuvin: Thank you for your letter regarding the disclosure of the Non-Prosecution Agreement signed by Jeffrey Epstein. I understand that you are asking for a copy of that Agreement in connection with your representation of "B.B." As you are aware, the Agreement contains a confidentiality provision. Based upon a lawsuit filed by some of Mr. Epstein's victims, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra has issued a Protective Order requiring the U.S. Attorney's Office to provide copies of the Agreement to certain individuals under certain circumstances. The Order states: if any individuals who have been identified by the USAO [U.S. Attorney's Office] as victims of Epstein and/or any attomey(s) for those individuals request the opportunity to review the Agreement, then the USAO shall produce the Agreement to those individuals, so long as those individuals also agree that they shall not disclose the Agreement or its terms to any third party absent further court order, following notice to and an opportunity for Epstein's counsel to be heard... (Court File No. 08-CV-80737-MARRA, DE 26, 1 (e).) The language "individuals who have been identified by the USAO as victims of Epstein" refers to a specific list of individuals who were the subject of the federal investigation. A list of those individuals was provided to Mr. Epstein's attorney. Your client, B.B., was not identified during that investigation, and, therefore was not on the list. By stating this I am not, in any way, denigrating any harm that your client may have suffered. I am simply stating that, given time and resource limitations that we faced during the investigation, B.B. was not a person who was positively identified, such that she would have been the subject of charges within a EFTA00233468

SPENCER T. KUVIN, ESQ. AUGUST 4, 2009 PAGE 2 possible federal indictment. For this reason, your client is not covered by the Court's Protective Order and the Agreement's confidentiality provision remains intact. If you are unable to get a copy of the Agreement via the civil discovery process in the lawsuit that you have filed against Mr. Epstein, please ask his counsel if they will consent to my production of the Agreement to you and I will send a copy to you. Sincerely, kiffir-3/ Cleurtian Acting United States Attorney By: cc: Karen Atkinson, Esq. Assistant U.S. Attorney EFTA00233469

I I) Ft) I l:s1ICI. '•Al T1 LEOPOLD-KUVIN. CONSUMER JUSTICE ATTORNEYS January 4, 2010 Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of Florida 500 E. Broward Blvd, 7th Floor Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33394 Re: B.B. I JEFFREY EPSTEIN OUR FILE NO.: 080303 Dear After taking the deposition of Police Chief, it came to our attention that apparently a computer which was initially seized dunng the search warrant conducted on Mr. Epstein's home was returned by the FBI to a private investigator employed by Mr. Epstein. We would like to determine who this computer was returned to, and when it was returned. It would assist us greatly if you could check your records to determine when, and if, this was ever done. Additionally, according to the sworn testimony of Chief es department was provided with a letter containing a list of potential victims of Mr. Epstein. This letter contained language pursuant to a previously unknown Federal Statute which apparently directed him to destroy the letter after reading it. We hereby request that your office advise what Statute or Code that letter was referring to. Finally, we would like to schedule the depositions of FBI Special Agents Please let me know who we need to direct our subpoenas to in order to schedule these depositions. I appreciate your immediate attention to this matter. Should you have any additional questions about these issues, please do not hesitate to contact me at once. STK:mlb CRAsl IWORTIIINESS • MANAGED CARE ABUSE • CONSUMER CLASS ACTIONS • PERSONAL INJURY • WRONGFUL DEATH EFTA00233470

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 1 of 19 aglepeltel An Sealed IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Civil Action No. 10-80309 JANE DOE No. 103, Plaintiff, I JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. FILED byjaD C FEB 2 3 2010 STEVEN M. LARIMORE CLERK IJ S 01ST CT 8. C. of FI.A. - MIAMI COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 103 ("Plaintiff'), brings this Complaint against Defendant, Jeffrey Epstein ("Defendant"), and states as follows: PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE 1. At all times material to this cause of action, Plaintiff was a resident of Palm Beach County, Florida. 2. This Complaint is brought under a fictitious name to protect the identity of Plaintiff because this Complaint makes sensitive allegations of sexual assault and abuse of a then minor. 3. At all times material to this cause of action, Defendant owned a residence located at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. 4. Defendant is presently a citizen of the United States Virgin Islands. Pursuant to the plea agreement entered by the Defendant in state court and the sentencing which occurred on June 30, 2008, Defendant is currently under community control in Palm Beach County, Florida. Seakd Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 25 West Plaster Street Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami VKAS8.2800 Fax 305358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.4614346 .j\C)1‘.S() rewre.podhunittom EFTA00233471

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 2 of 19 5. Defendant is an adult male born on January 20, 1953. 6. This Court has jurisdiction over this action and the claims set forth herein pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255. 7. This Court has venue of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), as a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred in this District. STATEMENT OF FACTS 8. At all relevant times, Defendant was an adult male spanning the ages of 45 and 55 years old. Defendant is known as a billionaire financier and money manager with a secret clientele limited exclusively to billionaires. He is a man of tremendous wealth, power, and influence. He owns a fleet of aircraft that includes a Gulfstream IV, a helicopter, and a Boeing 727, as well as a fleet of motor vehicles. Until his incarceration pursuant to the plea entered and sentencing, which occurred on June 30, 2008, he maintained his principal place of residence in the largest dwelling in Manhattan, a 51,000-square-foot eight-story mansion on the Upper East Side. He also owns a $6.8 million mansion in Palm Beach, Florida, a $30 million 7,500-acre ranch in New Mexico he named "Zorro," a 70-acre private island known as Little St. James in the U.S. Virgin Islands, a mansion in London's Westminster neighborhood, and another residence in the Avenue Foch area of Paris. The allegations herein concern Defendant's conduct while at his lavish residence in Palm Beach and numerous other locations both nationally and internationally. 9. Defendant has a sexual preference for underage minor girls. lie engaged in a plan, scheme, or enterprise in which he gained access to countless vulnerable and relatively economically disadvantaged minor girls, and sexually assaulted, molested, and/or exploited these girls, and then gave them money. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 2 25 West Flagler Street. Suite 800. Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305358.2382 • Fat Lauderdale 954.463.4316 www.podhurst.com EFTA00233472

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 3 of 19 10. Beginning in or around 1998 through in or around September 2007, Defendant used his resources and his influence over vulnerable minor girls to engage in a systematic pattern of sexually exploitative behavior. 11. Defendant's plan and scheme reflected a particular pattern and method. Defendant coerced and enticed impressionable, vulnerable, and relatively economically less fortunate minor girls to participate in various acts of sexual misconduct that he committed upon them. Defendant's scheme involved the use of underage girls, as well as other individuals, to recruit underage girls. Defendant and/or an authorized agent would call and alert Defendant's assistants shortly before or after he arrived at his Palm Beach residence. His assistants would call economically disadvantaged and underage girls from West Palm Beach and surrounding areas who would be enticed by the money being offered and who Defendant and/or his assistants perceived as less likely to complain to authorities or have credibility issues if allegations of improper conduct were made. The then minor Plaintiff and other minor girls, some as young as 14 years old, were transported to Defendant's Palm Beach mansion by Defendant's employees, agents, and/or assistants in order to provide Defendant with "massages." 12. Many of the instances of illegal sexual conduct committed by Defendant were perpetrated with the assistance, support, and facilitation of at least three assistants who helped him orchestrate this child exploitation enterprise. These assistants would arrange times for underage girls to come to Defendant's residence, transport or cause the transportation of underage girls to Defendant's residence, escort the underage girls to the massage room where Defendant would be waiting or would enter shortly thereafter, urge the underage girls to remove their clothes, deliver cash from Defendant to the underage girls and/or their procurers at the conclusion of each "massage appointment," and assist Defendant in taking nude photographs Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 3 25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Muni 305358.2800 Fax 306358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.podhurst.corn EFTA00233473

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 4 of 19 and/or videos of the underage girls with and/or without their knowledge. Defendant would pay the procurer of each girl's "appointment" hundreds of dollars. 13. Defendant designed this scheme to secure a private place in Defendant's Palm Beach mansion where only persons employed and invited by Defendant would be present, so as to reduce the chance of detection of Defendant's sexual abuse and/or exploitation, as well as to make it more difficult for the minor girls to flee the premises and/or to credibly report his actions to law enforcement or other authorities. The girls were usually transported by his employee(s), agent(s), and/or assistant(s) and/or by taxicab(s) and/or motor vehicle(s) paid for by Defendant, which also made it difficult for the girls to flee his mansion. 14. Upon her initial arrival at Defendant's Palm Beach mansion, each underage victim would generally be introduced to one of Defendant's assistants, who would gather the girl's personal contact information. The minor girl would be led up a remote flight of stairs to a room that contained a massage table and a large shower. 15. At times, if it was the girl's first "massage" appointment, another female would be in the room to "lead the way." Generally the other female would leave, or Defendant would dismiss her. Often, Defendant would start his massage wearing only a small towel, which eventually would be removed. Defendant and/or the other female would direct the girl to massage him, giving the minor girl specific instructions as to where and how he wanted to be touched, and then direct her to remove her clothing. Defendant would then perform one or more lewd, lascivious, and sexual acts, including masturbation; fondling the minor's breasts and/or sexual organs; touching the minor's vulva, vagina, and/or anus with a vibrator, back massager, his finger(s), and/or his penis; digitally penetrating her vagina; performing intercourse, oral sex, and/or anal sex; and/or coercing or attempting to coerce the girl to engage in lewd acts and/or Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 4 25 West Resler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 3053582500 Fax 305.3582382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 www.pocUsunt.coan EFTA00233474

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 5 of 19 prostitution and/or enticing the then minor girl to engage in sexual acts with another female in Defendant's presence. The exact degree of molestation and frequency with which the sexual exploitations took place varied and is not yet completely known; however, Defendant committed such acts regularly on a daily basis and, in most instances, several times a day. In order to facilitate the daily exchanges of money for sexual assault and abuse, Defendant kept U.S. currency readily available. 16. Defendant traveled out of Florida to Palm Beach for the purpose of luring minor girls to his mansion to sexually abuse and/or batter them. He used the telephone to contact these minor girls for the purpose of coercing them into acts of prostitution and to enable himself to commit sexual battery against them and/or acts of lewdness in their presence, and he conspired with others, including his employee(s), assistant(s), driver(s), pilot(s), and/or agent(s), to facilitate these acts and to avoid police detection. Defendant's systematic pattern of sexually exploitative behavior described above also occurred in Defendant's other domestic and/or international residences, places of lodging, and/or modes of transportation. 17. Consistent with the foregoing plan and scheme, Defendant used his money, wealth, and power to unduly and improperly manipulate and influence the then minor Plaintiff. A vulnerable young girl, Plaintiff was merely a seventeen year old high school student when she was first lured into Defendant's sexually exploitative world in or about January 2004. Plaintiff was recruited while at work by a co-worker, one of the minor victims Defendant paid to procure underage females. Plaintiff went to Defendant's Palm Beach mansion accompanied by this co- worker. Upon arriving, Plaintiff was led by one of Defendant's assistants up a flight of stairs to a spa room with a shower and a massage table. Defendant entered this room wearing only a towel. Defendant suddenly removed his towel, exposing his naked body, and then lay on the massage Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 5 25 Weal Flagler Street Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2800 Fax 305358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 I www.podhund.com EFTA00233475

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 6 of 19 table. Defendant told Plaintiff to massage his back and take off her clothing, which she refused to do. Defendant then began to try to touch the minor Plaintiff and/or take off her clothing. After Defendant's relentless pawing, she reluctantly removed some of her clothing. During this encounter, Defendant turned over on his back and fondled Plaintiff's breasts, despite her repeatedly telling him not to do so. As Plaintiff massaged Defendant, Defendant proceeded to masturbate until ejaculation. Defendant then paid Plaintiff two hundred dollars, and Plaintiff was escorted out of Defendant's mansion and left Defendant's property. 18. A similar pattern of grooming continued, and the sexual exploitation progressively escalated, over the course of approximately seventeen months during which Defendant would often travel to Palm Beach. Prior to arriving and wHie in Palm Beach, Defendant and/or his agent(s) would frequently call Plaintiff at her home telephone number and/or other telephone numbers, arranging for encounters with her for Defendant, sometimes twice daily. While usually such contacts were made by his assistants, Defendant personally called Plaintiff repeatedly, despite being told to leave Plaintiff alone. After the first few encounters, Defendant coerced Plaintiff to remove all her clothing, and Defendant penetrated the minor Plaintiff's vagina digitally. Defendant sexually abused and/or battered and/or exploited Plaintiff at least a hundred times between approximately January 2004 and May 2005. Such exploitation included, but was not limited to, Defendant's sexual abuse and battery of Plaintiff with vibrator(s), back massager(s), his finger(s), and his penis. At times, Defendant manipulated Plaintiff to interact sexually with another female. During one encounter, Defendant penetrated the minor Plaintiff's vagina with his penis, all the while narrating and demonstrating his sexual battery of Plaintiff to another female present in the room. While some of the precise dates that Defendant's acts of sexual exploitation occurred are unknown to Plaintiff, these dates are known Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 6 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Want FL 33130, Nang 305358.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954A63.4346 1 www.podhurstcom EFTA00233476

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 7 of 19 to Defendant, as he and/or his assistants kept written records, some of which are in the custody of law enforcement, of each instance in which he committed lewd acts upon minor girls, including the then minor Plaintiff 19. Defendant's preference for underage girls was well-known to those who regularly procured them for him. The above-described acts of abuse began to occur during a time when Defendant knew that Plaintiff was a minor. Defendant, at all times material to this cause of action, knew and/or should have known of Plaintiffs age of minority. In fact, Defendant repeatedly urged the minor Plaintiff to become legally emancipated in order to accompany him as he traveled, both nationally and internationally. Additionally, Defendant, knowing that Plaintiff was merely seventeen years old, lured her by inviting her to stay with him at his mansion in Manhattan and arranging and/or paying for airplane tickets, theater tickets, and a personal chauffeur as gifts for her upcoming birthday. 20. As part of Defendant's persistent process of grooming Plaintiff and immersing her in his lewd and abusive lifestyle, Defendant regularly showered the ado! seent Plaintiff with gifts, including, but not limited to lingerie, flowers, bikini bathing suit(s), art book(s), purse(s), envelopes of U.S. currency, use of a car, and/or other accoutrements. 21. Defendant possessed photographs of nude underage girls, some of which may have been taken with hidden cameras set up in his residence in Palm Beach. On the day of Defendant's arrest, police found two hidden cameras and photographs of underage girls in Defendant's mansion. Defendant took lewd photographs of Plaintiff with his hidden cameras and transported lewd photographs of Plaintiff and other victims elsewhere using a facility or means of interstate and/or foreign commerce. On one occasion, Defendant manipulated the minor Plaintiff to pose nude for him and photographed her using several rolls of film. One or Podhurst Orseck, P.A. '7 25 West Flagkr Street Suite 800, Miami FL 33130, Miami 305358.2800 Fax 305358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 I swnv.podhurstoom EFTA00233477

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 8 of 19 W more of those nude photographs of Plaintiff that were taken by the Defendant when she was a minor were confiscated by the Palm Beach Police Department during its execution of a search warrant of Defendant's Palm Beach mansion on October 20, 2005. 22. Defendant was particularly skillful at discerning his minor victims' respective hopes, dreams, and ambitions. As he did with many of his victims, Defendant lured Plaintiff early-on with modeling opportunities, impressing her with his modeling business and contacts with supermodels, indicating that he could help her with a modeling career. 23. Knowing that the minor Plaintiff was an excellent student and desired to attend New York University or Columbia University, Defendant pretended to show great interest in her college admission, and offered to help her with her applications and to assist her with her tuition. Defendant had told Plaintiff of his substantial connections within the academic community, a matter about which he often bragged. Defendant took it upon himself to take control of Plaintiff's college application process and led Plaintiff to believe that he was sincere about helping her. Even though she had earned a Bright Futures Scholarship to the Florida college of her choice, Defendant insisted that she would not need it, and that, with his involvement, she would be admitted into one or both of the universities in New York. As a result of Defendant's manipulation, Plaintiff did not apply timely for the Bright Futures Scholarship or to any college, and therefore missed the fall semester of her freshman year. When the Palm Beach Police Department executed the search warrant on Defendant's mansion, among the artifacts found and confiscated were Plaintiff's high school transcript. 24. In June 2008, after an investigation by the Palm Beach Police Department, the State Attorney's Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the United States Attorney's Office, Defendant entered pleas of "guilty" to one count of solicitation of prostitution, in Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 8 25 West Hagler Street. Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 3(6.358.2900 Fax 305358.2'182 • Fort Lauderdale 954.163.4346 I w w w . p o d h u r s t r o m EFTA00233478

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 9 of 19 violation of Fla. Stat. § 796.07, and one count of solicitation of a minor to engage in prostitution, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 796.03 in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Florida. 25. As a condition of that plea, Defendant entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement, Addendum, and Affirmation (collectively, the "NPA") with the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida on September 24, 2007, October 29, 2007, and December 7, 2007, respectively. In so doing, Defendant acknowledged that Plaintiff was one of his victims and agreed to the following provisions of the NPA : 8. If any of the [acknowledged victims] elects to file suit pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255, Epstein will not contest the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida over his person and/or the subject matter, and Epstein waives his right to contest liability and also waives his right to contest damages up to an amount agreed to between the identified individual and Epstein, so long as the identified individual elects to proceed exclusively under 18 U.S.C. §2255, and agrees to waive any other claim for damages, whether pursuant to state, federal or common law. 10. Except as to those individuals who elect to proceed exclusively under 18 U.S.C. §2255, as set forth in paragraph (8), supra, neither Epstein's signature on this agreement, nor its terms, nor any resulting waivers or settlements by Epstein are to be construed as admissions of evidence or evidence of civil or criminal liability or a waive of any jurisdictional or other defense as to any person, whether or not her name appears on the list provided by the United States (emphasis added). 26. Plaintiff was among the individuals identified by the United States Attorney's Office as victims of Defendant upon whose testimony it intended to base its federal prosecution of Defendant for his illegal conduct. Consequently, Defendant is estopped by his state court plea and the Non-Prosecution Agreement from denying the acts alleged in this Complaint and must effectively admit liability to Plaintiff, Jane Doe No. 103. COUNT ONE Podhurst Orseck, RA. 9 75 West Hagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.3582800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.4634346 www.podtturatcom EFTA00233479

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 10 of 19 (Cause of Action for Coercion and Enticement of Minor to Engage in Prostitution or Sexual Activity pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255 in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 4 2422(b)) 27. Plaintiff hereby adopts, repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 26 above. 28. Defendant used a facility or means of interstate and/or foreign commerce to knowingly persuade, induce, entice, or coerce Plaintiff, when she was under the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution and/or sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempted to do so, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255 in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). 29. Plaintiff was a victim of one or more offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and, as such, asserts a cause of action against Defendant pursuant to this Section of the United States Code. 30. As a direct and proximate result of the offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255 being committed against the then minor Plaintiff by Defendant, Plaintiff has in the past suffered, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family, and other damages associated with Defendant's manipulating and luring her into a perverse and unhealthy way of life. The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses, and Plaintiff will in the future incur additional medical and psychological expenses. Plaintiff has suffered a loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of the capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature, and Plaintiff will continue to suffer these losses in the future. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 10 25 West Flag/er Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358 2800 Fax 305358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4316 t wenv.podhuracom EFTA00233480

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 11 of 19 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, including, without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other further relief as this Court deems just and proper, and hereby demands trial by jury on all issues triable as of right by a jury. COUNT TWO (Cause of Action for Travel with Intent to Enaaae in Illicit Sexual Conduct pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255 in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 24231bn 31. Plaintiff hereby adopts, repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs I through 26 above. 32. Defendant traveled in interstate and/or foreign commerce for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2423(f), with minor females, including the then minor Plaintiff, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b). 33. Plaintiff was a victim of one or more oftbnses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and, as such, asserts a cause of action against Defendant pursuant to this Section of the United States Code. 34. As a direct and proximate result of the offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255 being committed against the then minor Plaintiff by Defendant, Plaintiff has in the past suffered, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family, and other damages associated with Defendant's manipulating and luring her into a perverse and unhealthy way of life. The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses, and Plaintiff will in the future incur additional medical and psychological expenses. Plaintiff has suffered a loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 11 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, Fl. 33130, Miami 305358.2800 Fax 305158.2182 • Feat Lauderdale 954.463.4346 I www.podhunt.com EFTA00233481

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 12 of 19 income in the future, and a loss of the capacity to enjoy life. These injur:es are permanent in nature, and Plaintiff will continue to suffer these losses in the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, including, without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other further relief as this Court deems just and proper, and hereby demands trial by jury on all issues triable as of right by a jury. COUNT THREE (Cause of Action for Sexual Exploitation of Children pursuant to 18 U.S.C. & 2255 in Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251) 35. Plaintiff hereby adopts, repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 26 above. 36. Defendant knowingly persuaded, induced, enticed, or coerced the then minor Plaintiff to engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of such conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251. 37. Plaintiff was a victim of one or more offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and, as such, asserts a cause of action against Defendant pursuant to this Section of the United States Code. 38. As a direct and proximate result of the offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255 being committed against the then minor Plaintiff by Defendant, Plaintiff has in the past suffered, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family, and other damages associated with Defendant's manipulating and luring her into a perverse and unhealthy way of life. The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 12 25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, F133130. Mlanti 305358.2800 Fax 305358.2382 • Port Lauderdale 954.40.4346 t wvo.v.podtaustcom EFTA00233482

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 13 of 19 and psychological expenses, and Plaintiff will in the future incur additional medical and psychological expenses. Plaintiff has suffered a loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of the capacity to enjoy life. These injuries arc permanent in nature, and Plaintiff will continue to suffer these losses in the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, including, without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other further relief as this Court deems just and proper, and hereby demands trial by jury on all issues triable as of right by a jury. COUNT FOUR (Cause of Action for Transport of Visual Depiction of Minor Engaging in Sexually Explicit Conduct pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 2255 in Violation of 18 U.S.C. §2252(a)(1)1 39. Plaintiff hereby adopts, repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 26 above. 40. Defendant knowingly mailed, transported, shipped, or sent via computer and/or facsimile in or affecting interstate and/or foreign commerce at least one visual depiction of the minor Plaintiff engaging in sexually explicit conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(I). 41. Defendant transported lewd photographs of Plaintiff and other victims elsewhere using a facility or means of interstate and/or foreign commerce. 42. Plaintiff was a victim of one or more offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and, as such, asserts a cause of action against Defendant pursuant to this Section of the United States Code. 43. As a direct and proximate result of the offenstes enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255 being committed against the then minor Plaintiff by Defendant, Plaintiff has in the past suffered, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, Podhurst Orseck, RA. 13 25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami 305.358.2500 Fax 305358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 I www.podhurattom EFTA00233483

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 14 of 19 loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family, and other damages associated with Defendant's manipulating and luring her into a perverse and unhealthy way of life. The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses, and Plaintiff will in the future incur additional medical and psychological expenses. Plaintiff has suffered a loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of the capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature, and Plaintiff will continue to suffer these losses in the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, including, without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other further relief as this Court deems just and proper, and hereby demands trial by jury on all issues triable as of right by a jury. COUNT FIVE (Cause of Action for Transport of Child Pornography pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4 2255 in Violation of 18 U.S.C. 2252A(a)(1)) 44. Plaintiff hereby adopts, repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs I through 26 above. 45. Defendant knowingly mailed, transported, shipped, or sent via computer and/or facsimile in or affecting interstate and/or foreign commerce child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(I). 46. Defendant transported lewd photographs of Plaintiff and other victims elsewhere using a facility or means of interstate and/or foreign commerce. 47. Plaintiff was a victim of one or more offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and, as such, asserts a cause of action against Defendant pursuant to this Section of the United States Code. Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 14 26 West Flagkr Street, Suite 800, Miami, FL 33130, Miami X6.3582900 Fax 7063582382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 t www.podhuratcout EFTA00233484

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 15 of 19 48. As a direct and proximate result of the offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255 being committed against the then minor Plaintiff by Defendant, Plaintiff has in the past suffered, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family, and other damages associated with Defendant's manipulating and luring her into a perverse and unhealthy way of life. The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses, and Plaintiff will in the future incur additional medical and psychological expenses. Plaintiff has suffered a loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of the capacity to enjoy life. These injuries arc permanent in nature, and Plaintiff will continue to suffer these losses in the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, including, without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other further relief as this Court deems just and proper, and hereby demands trial by jury on all issues triable as of right by a jury. COUNT SIX (Cause of Action for Engaging in a Child Exploitation Enterprise pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 42255 in Violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(2)) 49. Plaintiff hereby adopts, repeats, realleges, and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs I through 26 above and Counts One through Five above. 50. Defendant knowingly engaged in a child exploitation enterprise, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(g)(2), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(g)( I ). As more fully set forth above, Defendant engaged in actions that constitute countless violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1591 (sex trafficking of children), Chapter 110 (sexual exploitation of children in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ Podhurst Orseck, P.A. I5 25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800, Miami, F1.33130, Miami 3053582900 Fax 305.3582382 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4346 I www.podhurst.com EFTA00233485

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 16 of 19 2251, 2252(a)(1), and 2252(A)(a)(1)), and Chapter 117 (transportation for illegal sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2421. 2422(b), and 2423(b)). As more fully set forth above in paragraphs I through 26, Defendant's actions involved countless victims and countless separate incidents of sexual abuse, which he committed against minors, including Plaintiff, in concert with at least three other persons. 51. Plaintiff was a victim of one or more offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255, and, as such, asserts a cause of action against Defendant pursuant to this Section of the United States Code. 52. As a direct and proximate result of the offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 2255 being committed against the then minor Plaintiff by Defendant, Plaintiff has in the past suffered, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, contusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family, and other damages associated with Defendant's manipulating and luring her into a perverse and unhealthy way of life. The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses, and Plaintiff will in the future incur additional medical and psychological expenses. Plaintiff has suffered a loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of the capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature, and Plaintiff will continue to suffer these losses in the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, including, without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 16 25 West Flagler Street Suite 800, Minµ FL 33130, Nand 305.358.2800 Fax 305358.2322 • Fort Lauderdale 954.463.4316 www.podhurst.com EFTA00233486

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 17 of 19 attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other further relief as this Court deems just and proper, and hereby demands trial by jury on all issues triable as of right by a jury. Date: ‘44..Art.AA-r-12)-3 , 2010. Respectfully Submitted, By: R-W- C. e-pecli lay Robert r Jose e g Katherine W. Ezell Attorneys or Plaintiff Podhurst Orseck, P.A. 17 25 West Hagler Street, Suite 800„ Miami, FL 33130, Miami 31:6393.2800 Fax 305.358.2382 • Fort Lauderdale 954463A346 rst EFTA00233487

.435 A IRey. ICOR) Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 PagDe 18 of 19 WilD CIVIL COVER SHEET Then 44 civilcover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplanau the filingand service of pkadings or other spas as roquircd by law, except as provided by local rules °feast This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974. is required forth o lag of Coup for the purpose of initiating the civil docket Acct. oat INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.) NOTICE: Attorneys MUST Indica led Cases Below. I. (a) PLAINTIFFS Jane Doe No. 103 io-8U (b) County of Resider & of First Listed Plaintiff West Palm Beach (EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (c) Attorney's (Firm Nets*. Addrtu. one Tapirs/ Number) Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq./Katherine W. Ezell, F.sq. Podhurst °meek, P.A. My. stein M n NTS e FILED by rp__ D C. County of Residence of First Listed Dcfcriam Unite . tales Virgin (IN U.S. PLAINT F CASES ONLY) 20* NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION OASES. fay. 24, THE 7 LAND 'IWO/val. SYEVEm R4 LARluODE AC I Attorneys Or Keen) CLERK U.S. DIST. CT. Robert D. Critton, Esq., Burman, (..sitioltaataCaitIL.L...p, • 303 Banyan Blvd., Suite 400, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 WI Check County Whine Mien &OM CI MIAMI. OAHE O MONROE fl BROW AR D 16 PALM BEACH 3 MARTIN 0 SI. LUCIE 3 INDIAN RIVER 0 OKEECHOBEE HIGHLANDS II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION O I V. S. Dovoramom PNWIr O 2 LI S.COPT/10CM Dekndani /13 (Place en - X' • Ott Bist Osyl Carol portion (U.S. 0 ***** meal Nolo Party) 3 4 Onenky Undicer cieuissaip of Praia. • IOUS III) IV. NATURE ' Pis not 0.1 I CONTRACT TORTS POTIFEITURECITNALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES I 0 110 tolerance 0 Ill Manse 0 U0 Miller Act 0 140 Nogonabk Insiniesei 3 ISO Recovery of 0 ye:payers* & Ceferemer of nufroect O 151 Madame. Art 0 IS) Recovery of De(aoned Student Loans Mod Veterans) 0 133 Remarry of Overpayment of Velerio'• Sea41114 0 160 Slockbolden' Suitt 0190 Other Centro O 19S Contract Prodwif Liability 0 106 trencher PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 0 310 Aitylsoe 3 36:terser I fejury • O 113 Airflow Product Med. Maserlke Lethality 3 365 teleran tarry • O31O Assert. Libel • Proctor, Liability Slander 0 364 Asbeslos Parris' 0130 Federal Emplorts. latery Prod.., Liobilny Lisbilry 0 140 Marine PERSONAL PROPERTY 0 )45 Merin Proud 0 370 Other Ford Liabitiry 0 37i Tomb In Eerier 0 350 Manor Vehicle 0 Ito Oilet Personal 0 155 Motor Vehicle Properly Damage hydro LIMOMY 3 355 Propeny Demise • 360 Other Personal Product trability IWorY 0 610 Remotion 0 620 Other Food • Dr. 0 615 Drug Related Seiniee of Prow, 21 USC III 0 630 LWeee Laws 0 640 R.R. • Truck 0 630 A KWH Rest n 640 Oreoprional Sereiffifealch o 690 Other 0 422 Appeal 21 USC 151 0 423 Willtdrowsl 25 USC I)/ 3 400 Sloe RcepporSool 3 410 Amore 3 430 Hanks and Seabing 0 450 Comment 0 460 09poneloa 0 470 Rat (deer lathered NW Court Orpoilailer 3 IRO Coruna C NCI 0 490 CeblOSsi TV 0 410 Selective Service 0 1St Setettles/Coalstothlet/ fl are. 0 575 Comm. Challenge 12 USC 3410 0 590 [Other Parlor Action. 0 691 Agrieurral Acts 0 692 Economic Slabilhation Act 3 103 E9990:666Nomi Malta. 0 (94 [orgy Alloralon Act 0 195 Freedom of lafeesellon Ace D 900 Appeal of Fee Determinatio• Under Equal Access to Janice 0 150 Constitutionality of Stoic Siatas PROPERTY RIGHTS O *20 Copyrights 0 130 Patent O IA0 /radian& L LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY 5 710 Fair Labor Sialiderde Act 3 720 Lebellki gait Reletiorn 0 730 LaboralgeoLlteporeing a Dbrlorro Act 0 740 Railway Leber Ad 3 790 Other Labor Litigate* 0 79) Foga Roe In. Scrorler Ail 0561 141A (I 391f11 0 162 Black Lunt:1423) 0161 DIWODIWW 1405(g)) 3 564 *SID Thlo X VI 0 461151146,1.)) I REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS FEDERAL TAX SUITS 3 210 Lem, Coarleilleallea 0 220 Foreclosure 0 230 Rem Lease • Ejeclarl 0 240 Tons to Load 0 245 Ton Prawn 'Ability O 290 All Other Real Propiery 0 441 Verlag 0 442 Employers 0 44) Horlagr Accommodations 3 444 Welfare 445 Ante wrthubilkka ..... 3 t mployers, 0 446 Amer. ia/Dlashiliams - 3 Orr 3 440 Orber Cent R4),, 0 510 Motion* to Vacate semen* Rohm's Corpus: .1 $30 I:lewd 0 535 Death Perky I 340 Mastellive a Other 5511C Wil Ishii 0 sss „ son cosies. 0 470 ttttt (U.S. Plaintiff or Ocke4sai) O 1171 IRS —Turd Party 26 CSC 7609 I ms4trgATmN O 142 Witr ahrni* Application 463 Haber C Aro 5 Demises 0 445,0therlinm•rolioa Ac Ins III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PAR TIES(russ se ia 0•4 Br foe Plelmiff for Unruly Corr Only) is One Bee fee Deferadaoll PT. 0EV MP DE? Celt n of This Sim I I 0 I Incorporatcd or Pall( ben Plate 0 4 0 4 of IIIIIS410 In This Slaw ; Chun of Another Sure 3 a fa 2 Ineorpomied and Prinelpil Plage or Rosiness In A soar Stow Cilacn or Subject of a 0 1 0 3 FOIere• Nellie total.. COyerrY O S 0 $ O 6 3 6 I ORIGIN (Mess - X" is Or Oely) 47) I Original Cl 2 Removed from CI 3 Re-fitcd- Proceeding State Court (see VI below) Trans erred from O 4 Reinstated or ti 5 another district CJ 4 health:KUM Reopened (specify) Litigation Appall." District O 7 ludge from Magistrate hxlsnau VI. RELATED/RE-FILED CASE(S). (See instructor nerd page) a) Re-fikd Case OYES 83 NO b) Related Casts 01 YES ONO JUDGE Kenneth A. Marra DOCKET NUMBER Sec Attached. VII. CAUSE OF ACTION Ci c the U.S. Civil Statute under which you arc filing and Write a Brief Statement of Cause (De Not die Jarhdialonal statutes aimless diversity): 18 U.S.C. 2255 (Predicate Statutes 18 U.S.C. 2422(b), 2423(b), 2423(e), 2251,2252, 2252A(a)(I), 2252A(g)(1) LENGTH OF TRIAL vie I days estimated (for both sides 10 try entire case) VIII. REQUESTED IN 0 CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMANDS CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint: COMPLAINT: UNDER F.R.C.P. 21 2 -9 eyne cc- DC gt 'ZS--Mee. JURY DEMAND: f i a t? No SIGNATURE Of ATTORNEY OF RECORD i D ATE Si FSLS-j: 14 -• lA • Eadat--- 07 :37/0 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY AMOUNT 3S P •,f) 0 RECEIPT 4 (Of 1Not,,p__ IF. ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE & CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE EFTA00233488

Case 9:10-cv-80309-WJZ Document 1 Entered an FLSD Docket 03/09/2010 Page 19 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION ATTACHMENT TO CIVIL COVER SHEET FOR: Jane Doe 103 Jeffrey Epstein VI. RELATED PENDING CASES 08-80119 - KAM 08-80232 - KAM 08-80380 - KAM 08-80381 - KAM 08-80811 - KAM 08-80893 - KAM 08-80993 - KAM 08-80994 - KAM 09-80469 - KAM 09-80802 - KAM 09-81092 - KAM EFTA00233489

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 10-80309-CIV- JANE DOE No. 103, Plaintiff, vs. JEFFERY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEFENDANT EPSTEIN'S MOTION TO DISMISS, & FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT & STRIKE DIRECTED TO PLAINTIFF JANE DOE NO. 103'S COMPLAINT 'dated 2/23/20101 Defendant, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, ("EPSTEIN"), by and through his undersigned counsel, moves to dismiss Counts One through Six of Plaintiff JANE DOE 103's Complaint for failure to state a cause of action, as specified herein. Rule I 2(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P. (2009); Local Gen. Rule 7.1 (S.D. Fla. 2009). Defendant further moves for more definite statement and to strike. Rule I 2(e) and (0, In support of his motion, Defendant states: The Complaint attempts to allege 6 counts, all of which arc purportedly brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255 — Civil Remedies for Personal Injuries. Dismissal is required on the following grounds: (I) 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 allows for a single recovery of "actual damages." (A.) Statutory Considerations: the statute does not allow for the Plaintiff to allege multiple counts, six in this case, or multiple predicate act violations or incidents, in an effort to multiply or seek duplicate recoveries of her "actual damages" EFTA00233490

based on the number of predicate act violations or incidents. The statutory minimum is just that — a minimum; nothing prevents a plaintiff from proving and recovering "actual damages" in excess of the minimum amount. (B.) Constitutional Considerations: in the alternative, constitutional principles require that the statute be interpreted as allowing for a single recovery of one's damages. Thus, to the extent Plaintiff is seeking to improperly multiply or seek duplicate recoveries of her actual damages, the action is required to be dismissed. (2) The statute in effect during the time of the alleged conduct applies — the version in effect from 1999 to July 26, 2006, not the statute as amended in 2006, effective July 27, 2006. To the extent Plaintiff is attempting to rely on the amended version of the statute, such reliance is improper and also requires dismissal of the entire action. (3) Count VI is also subject to dismissal because the predicate act relied upon by Plaintiff did not come into effect until July 27, 2006, well after the conduct alleged by Plaintiff occurred. Supporting Memorandum of Law Principles of Statutory Interpretation It is well settled that in interpreting a statute, the court's inquiry begins with the plain and unambiguous language of the statutory text. CBS. Inc.'. Prime Time 24 Venture 245 F.3d 1217 (I 1th Cir. 2001)• U.S.. Castroneves, 2009 WL 528251, •3 (S.D. Fla. 2009), citing Reeves Astrue, 526 F.3d 732, 734 (11th Cir. 2008); and Smith I. Husband, 376 F.Supp.2d at 610 ("When interpreting a statute, [a court's] inquiry begins with the text."). "The Court must first look to the plain meaning of the words, and scrutinize the statute's 'language, structure, and purpose.' Id. In addition, in construing a statute, a court is to presume that the legislature said what it means and means what it said, and not add language or give some absurd or strained interpretation. As stated in 2 EFTA00233491

CBS Inc. supra at 1228 — "Those who ask courts to give effect to perceived legislative intent by interpreting statutory language contrary to its plain and unambiguous meaning are in effect asking courts to alter that language, and '[c]ourts have no authority to alter statutory language.... We cannot add to the terms of [the] provision what Congress left out.' Merritt, 120 F.3d at 1187." See also Dodd U.S., 125 S.Ct. 2478 (2005); 73 A m.J ur.2d Statutes §124. Title 18 of the U.S.C. is entitled "Crimes and Criminal Procedure." §2255 is contained in "Part I. Crimes, Chap. 110. Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children." I8 U.S.C. §2255 (2002), is entitled Civil remedy for personal injuries, and provides: (a) Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 224I(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than $50,000 in value. (b) Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. See endnote I hereto for statutory text as amended in 2006, effective July 27, 2006. Prior to the 2006 amendments, the version of the statute quoted above was in effect beginning in 1999.1 1 The above quoted version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 was the same beginning in 1999 until amended in 2006, effective July 27, 2006. 3 EFTA00233492

Motion to Dismiss (1) The remedy afforded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 82255 allows for a single recovery of "actual damages" by a plaintiff against a defendant. The recovery afforded is not on a per violation or per incident or per count basis.2 (A.) Statutory Considerations. 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 - Civil Remedy for Personal Injuries, creates a federal cause of action or "civil remedy" for a minor victim of sexual, abuse, molestation and exploitation, and allows for a single recovery of the "actual damages" sustained and proven by a "minor who is a victim of a violation" of an enumerated predicated act and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation." "18 U.S.C. §2255 gives victims of sexual conduct who are minors a private right of action." Martinez White, 492 F.Supp.2d 1186, 1188 (N.D. Cal. 2007). 18 U.S.C.A. §2255 "merely provides a cause of action for damages in `any appropriate United States District Court.'" Id, at 1189. Under the plain meaning of the statute, §2255 does not allow for the actual damages sustained to be duplicated or multiplied on behalf of a plaintiff against a defendant on a "per violation" or "per incident" or "per count" basis. No where in the 2 In other §2255 actions filed against Defendant, Defendant has previously asserted the position that 18 U.S.C. §2255's creates a single cause of action on behalf of a plaintiff against a defendant, as opposed to multiple causes of action on a per violation basis or as opposed to an allowance of a multiplication of the statutory presumptive minimum damages or "actual damages." EPSTEIN asserts his position regarding the single recovery of damages in order to properly preserve all issues pertaining to the proper application of §2255 for appeal. EPSTEIN will fully honor his obligations as set forth in the Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney's Office; principally, as related to the claims made in this case by Jane Doe 103, the obligations as set forth in paragraph 8 of that Agreement. In particular, EPSTEIN will not contest the allegation that he committed at least one predicate offense as alleged by Jane Doe 103, a waiver sufficient to satisfy the 2255 statutory condition that Jane Doe 103 was a victim of the commission of one of the enumerated predicate violations as required. 4 EFTA00233493

statutory text is there any reference to the recovery of damages afforded by this statute as being on a "per violation" or "per incident" or "per count" basis. 18 U.S.C. 2255(a) creates a civil remedy for "a minor who is a victim of a violation of section 224I(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 225IA, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation ... ." The statute speaks in terms of the recovery of the "actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of suit, including attorney's fees." See 18 U.S.C. §2255(a) (2002). See Smith Husband, 428 F.Supp.2d 432 (E.D. Va. 2006); Smith Husband, 376 F.Supp.2d 603 (E.D. Va. 2006); Doe'. Liberatore 478 F.Supp.2d 742, 754 (M.D. Pa. 2007); and the recent cases in front of this court on Defendant's Motions to Dismiss and For More Definite Statement — Doe No. 2 Epstein, 2009 WL 383332 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); Doe No. 31. Epstein 2009 WL 383330 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); Doe No. 41. Epstein, 2009 WL 383286 (S.D. Ha. Feb. 12, 2009); and Doe No. 5I. Epstein, 2009 WI, 383383 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 12, 2009); see also U.S. Scheidt, Slip Copy, 2010 WL 144837, fn. 1 (E.D.CaI. Jan. II, 2010)- U.S.'. Rena, 2009 WI, 2579103, fn. I (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2009); U.S. Ferenci, 2009 WL 2579102, fn. I (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2009); U.S. Monk, 2009 WL 2567831, fn. I (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2009). U.S.' Zane, 2009 WL 2567832, fn.l (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18 2009). As to the meaning of "actual damages," the Eleventh Circuit in McMillian i t F.D.I.C., 81 F.3d 1041, 1055 (I I th Cir.1996)3, succinctly explained: 3 In McMillian the I 1th Circuit was faced with the task of the interpretation of the statutory term "actual direct compensatory damages" under FIRREA, 12 U.S.C. §I821W(3)(i). In doing so, the Court began with the plain meaning of the phrase. See Perrin g United States 444 U.S. 37, 42-43, 100 S.Ct. 311, 314, 62 L.Ed.2d 199 (1979) ("A fundamental canon of statutory construction is that, unless otherwise defined, words will besinterpreted as taking their ordinary, contemporary common meaning."). United States I McLymont, 45 F.3d 400, 401 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 514 U.S. 1077, 115 S.Ct. 5 EFTA00233494

... "Compensatory damages" arc defined as those damages that "will compensate the injured party for the injury sustained, and nothing more; such as will simply make good or replace the loss caused by the wrong or injury." Black's Law Dictionary (6th Ed.1991). "Actual damages," roughly synonymous with compensatory damages, arc defined as "[r]eal, substantial and just damages, or the amount awarded to a complainant in compensation for his actual and real loss or injury, as opposed ... to 'nominal' damages [and' 'punitive' damages." Id. Is Finally, "Idlirect damages arc such as follow immediately upon the act done." Id. Thus, "actual direct compensatory damages" appear to include those damages, flowing directly from the repudiation, which make one whole, as opposed to those which go farther by including future contingencies such as lost profits and opportunities or damages based on speculation. [Citation omitted]. ... FN15. According to Corpus Juris Secundum, " 'Compensatory damages' and 'actual damages' are synonymous terms ... and include[ all damages other than punitive or exemplary damages." 25 C.J.S. Damages § 2 (1966). (Emphasis added). See also, Fanin U.S. Dept. of Veteran Affairs, 2009 WI. 1677233 (111h Cir. June 17, 2009), citing Fitzpatrick IRS 665 F.2d 327, 331 (11th Cir. 1982), abrogated on other grounds by Doe'. Chao, 540 U.S. 614, 124 S.Ct. 1204 (2004\ "Actual damages" recoverable under the Privacy Act arc "proven pecuniary losses and not for generalized mental injuries, loss of reputation, embarrassment or other non-qualified injuries;" and the statutory minimum of $1,000 under the Privacy Act is not available unless the plaintiff suffered some amount of "actual damages."). Considering the plain meaning of "actual damages" and the purpose of such damages is to "make one whole," to allow a duplication or multiplication of the actual damages sustained is in direct conflict with the well entrenched legal principle against duplicative damages recovery. See generally, E.E.O.C. I. Waffle House, Inc. 534 U.S. 1723, 131 L.Ed.2d 581 (1995) ("Mhe plain meaning of this statute controls unless the language is ambiguous or leads to absurd results."). 6 EFTA00233495

279, 297, 122 S.Ct. 754, 766 (2002\"As we have noted, it 'goes without saying that the courts can and should preclude double recovery by an individual!"), citing General Telephone, 446 U.S., at 333, 100 S.Ct. 1698. The purpose of damages recovery where a Plaintiff has suffered personal injury as a result of Defendant's misconduct is to make the plaintiff whole, not to enrich the plaintiff. See 22 Am.Jur.2d Damages §36, stating the settled legal principle that — The law abhors duplicative recoveries, and a plaintiff who is injured by a defendant's misconduct is, for the most part, entitled to be made whole, not enriched. Hence, for one injury, there should be one recovery, irrespective of the availability of multiple remedies and actions. Stated otherwise, a party cannot recover the same damages twice, even if recovery is based on different theories. , a plaintiff who alleges separate causes of action is not permitted to recover more than the amount of damages actually suffered. There cannot be a double recovery for the same loss, even though different theories of liability are alleged in the complaint. ... . See also, 22 Am.Jur.2d Damages § 28 — The law abhors duplicative recoveries; in other words, a plaintiff who is injured by reason of a defendant's behavior is, for the most part, entitled to be made whole, not to be enriched. The sole object of compensatory damages is to make the injured party whole for losses actually suffered; the plaintiff cannot be made more than whole, make a profit, or receive more than one recovery for the same harm. Thus, a plaintiff in a civil action for damages cannot, in the absence of punitive or statutory treble damages, recover more than the loss actually suffered. The plaintiff is not entitled to a windfall, and the law will not put him in a better position than he would be in had the wrong not been done or the contract not been broken. Sec also recent case of U.S. Baker, 2009 WL 4572, at *8, (F.D. Tx. Dec. 7, 2009), wherein the Court was inclined to agree with the defendant's interpretation of §2255(a) of allowing for a single recovery of the statutory minimum damages amount as opposed to the government's argument that "the minimum amount of damages mandated by 18 U.S.C. §2255(a) applies to each of (pornographic) image produced by 7 EFTA00233496

[defendant]." The government attempted to argue that restitution should be equal to the statutory minimum amount times the 55 photos produced by defendant. In rejecting the government's argument, the Court reiterated that the statutory minimum is a floor for damages — in other words, a mandated minimum. Nothing prevents a plaintiff from proving that he or she suffered damages in a greater amount. In attempting to bring six counts pursuant to §2255, Plaintiff's complaint alleges in part that "Plaintiff was merely a seventeen year old high school student when she was first lured into Defendant's sexually exploitive world in or about January 2004." Complaint, ¶17. According to the allegations, Plaintiff "was recruited while at work by a co-worker, one of the minor victims Defendant paid to procure underage females." Id. The Complaint further alleges, ¶17-26, that Defendant "sexually abused and/or battered and/or exploited Plaintiff at least 100 times between January 2004 and May 2005." If Plaintiff were 17 in January, 2004, she was at least 18 (the age of majority) in January 2005, if not sooner .° Plaintiff alleges identical damages in each of the six counts. Complaint, ¶¶30, 34, 38, 43, 48, and 52. See endnote 2 hereto for Complaint allegations? In other words, Plaintiff is alleging and seeking recovery of duplicative damages in each of the six counts. To the extent Plaintiff is seeking to duplicate her "actual damages" on a per incident or per violation or per count basis, Plaintiff's action is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. 4 Defendant is moving for more definite statement requiring Plaintiff to specifically state her date of birth because her age and when she reached the age of majority may impact her ability to even pursue a §2255 claim. 8 EFTA00233497

Had Congress wanted to write in a multiplier of actual damages recoverable it could have easily done so. For an example of a statute wherein the legislature included the language "for each violation" in assessing a "civil penalty," see 18 U.S.C. §216, entitled "Penalties and injunctions," of Chapter 11 — "Bribery, Graft, and Conflict of Interests," also contained in Title 18 — "Crimes and Criminal Procedure." Subsection (b) of §216 gives the United States Attorney General the power to bring a "civil action ... against any person who engages in conduct constituting an offense under" specified sections of the bribery, graft, and conflicts of interest statutes. The statute further provides in relevant part that "upon proof of such conduct by a preponderance of the evidence, such person shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $50,000 for each violation or the amount of compensation which the person received or offered for the prohibited conduct, which ever amount is greater." As noted, 18 U.S.C. §2255 does not include such language. B. Constitutional Considerations.5 As set forth above, it is Defendant's position that the text of 18 U.S.C. §2255 does not allow a Plaintiff to pursue the recovery of actual damages or the minimum afforded under the statute on a "per violation" or "per incident" basis by attempting to allege multiple counts thereunder. In the alternative, if one were to assume that the language of §2255 were vague or ambiguous, under the constitutional based protections of due process, judicial restraint, and the rule of lenity applied in construing a statute, Defendant's position as to the meaning of the statute would prevail. See United States'. Santos 128 S.Ct. 2020, 2025 (2008). As summarized by the United States Supreme Court in Santos supra, at 2025: 3 See argument in sections (2) and (3) that follow which represent the predicate for the rule of lenity issue discussed in B. 9 EFTA00233498

... The rule of lenity requires ambiguous criminal laws to be interpreted in I favor of the defendants subjected to them. See United States Gradwell, 243 U.S. 476, 485, 37 S.Ct. 407, 61 L.Ed. 857 (1917); McBoyle . United States, 283 U.S. 25, 27, 51 S.Ct. 340, 75 L.Ed. 816 (1931); United States'. Bass, 404 U.S. 336, 347-349, 92 S.Ct. 515, 30 L.Ed.2d 488 (1971). This venerable rule not only vindicates the fundamental principle that no citizen should be held accountable for a violation of a statute whose commands are uncertain, or subjected to punishment that is not clearly prescribed. It also places the weight of inertia upon the party that can best induce Congress to speak more clearly and keeps courts from making criminal law in Congress's stead. ... In Santos the Court was faced with the interpretation of the term "proceeds" in the federal money laundering statute, 18 U.S.C. §1956. "The federal money-laundering statute prohibits a number of activities involving criminal `proceeds."' Id, at 2023. Noting that the term "proceeds" was not defined in the statute, the Supreme Court stated the well settled principle that "when a term is undefined, we give it its ordinary meaning." Id, at 2024. Under the ordinary meaning principle, the government's position was that proceeds meant "receipts," while the defendant's position was that proceeds meant "profits." The Supreme Court recognized that under either of the proffered "ordinary meanings," the provisions of the federal money-laundering statute were still coherent, not redundant, and the statute was not rendered "utterly absurd." Under such a situation, citing to a long line of cases and the established rule of lenity, "the tie must go to the defendant." Id, at 2025. See portion of Court's opinion quoted above. "Because the `profits' definition of `proceeds' is always more defendant friendly that the `receipts' definition, the rule of lenity dictates that it should be adopted." Id. The recent case of United States i. Berdcal 595 F.Supp.2d 1326 (S.D. Fla. 2009), further supports Defendant's argument that the "rule of lenity" requires that the Court resolve any statutory interpretation conflict in favor of Defendant. Assuming for the sake of argument that Plaintiff's multiple counts, leading to a multiplication of the statutory 10 EFTA00233499

damages amount, is a reasonable interpretation, like Defendant's reasonable interpretation, under the "rule of lenity," any ambiguity is resolved in favor of the least draconian measure. In Berdeal, applying the rule of lenity, the Court sided with the Defendants' interpretation of the Lacey Act which makes illegal the possession of snook caught in specified jurisdictions. The snook had been caught in Nicaraguan waters. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss asserting the statute did not encompass snook caught in foreign waters. The United States disagreed. Both sides presented reasonable interpretations regarding the reach of the statute. In dismissing the indictment, the Court determined that the rule of lenity required it to accept defendants' interpretation. To allow a duplication or multiplication would subject Defendant EPSTEIN to a punishment that is not clearly prescribed — an unwritten multiplier of the "actual damages" or the presumptive minimum damages. The rule of lenity requires that Defendant's interpretation of the remedy afforded under §2255 be adopted. In addition, under the Due Process Clause's basic principle of fair warning - ... a criminal statute must give fair warning of the conduct that it makes a crime ... . As was said in United States'. Harriss, 347 U.S. 612, 617, 74 S.Ct. 808, 812, 98 L.Ed. 989, `The constitutional requirement of definiteness is violated by a criminal statute that fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden by the statute. The underlying principle is that no man shall be held criminally responsible for conduct which he could not reasonably understand to be proscribed.' Thus we have struck down a [state] criminal statute under the Due Process Clause where it was not `sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to it what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties.' Connally I. General Const. Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391, 46 S.Ct. 126, 127, 70 Ltd. 322. We have recognized in such cases that `a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law,' ibid., and that 11 EFTA00233500

`No one may be required at peril of life, liberty or property to speculate as to the meaning of penal statutes. All arc entitled to be informed as to what the State commands or forbids.' Lanzctta I. New Jersey, 306 U.S. 451, 453, 59 S.Ct. 618, 619, 83 L.Ed. 888. Thus, applying the statutory analysis, in A. and these well-entrenched constitutional principles of statutory interpretation and application in 13., Plaintiff's cause of action — Counts One through Six — to the extent Plaintiff is attempting to multiply actual damages or the presumptive amount of damages, is required to be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. f2) In addition, if Plaintiff is relying on the amended version of 18 U.S.C. 622SS, such reliance is improper and requires dismissal of the entire action. It is Defendant's position that 18 U.S.C. 42255 in effect prior to the 2006 amendments applies to this action. f3) Further, Count Six is also required to be dismissed as it relies on a predicate act that was not in effect at the time of the alleged conduct.6 Plaintiff does not specifically allege in her Complaint on which version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 she is relying. However, in the purported Count Six of her Complaint, 150, she alleges that Defendant "knowingly engaged in a child exploitation enterprise, as defined in 18 U.S.C. §2252A(g)(2), in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2252A(g)(1)." §2252A is one of the specified predicate acts under 18 U.S.C. §2255. However, subsection (g) of §2252 was not added to the statute until 2006. Thus, to the extent that Plaintiff is relying on the amended version, such reliance is improper and the entire action is required to be dismissed. Further, in the alternative, Count Six is required to be dismissed as it relies on a statutory predicate act that did not exist at the time of the alleged conduct. The statute in effect during the time the alleged conduct occurred is 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2005) — the version in effect prior to the 2006 amendment, eff. Jul. 27, 2006, ° Points (2) and (3) are addressed together as the legal arguments overlap. 12 EFTA00233501

(quoted above), and having an effective date of 1999 through July 26, 2006. See endnote 1 hereto. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges that Defendant's conduct occurred during the time period from the age of 17, January 2004 until approximately May 2005. Complaint, VII 7, 18. Thus, the version in effect in 2004-2005 of 18 U.S.C. §2255 applies. Under applicable law, the statute in effect at the time of the alleged conduct applies. See U.S. Scheidt, Slip Copy, 2010 WL 144837, fn. 1 (E.D.Cal. Jan. 11, 2010); U.S. I. Remo, 2009 WI, 2579103, fn. 1 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2009)• U.S. Ferenc', 2009 WI. 2579102, fn. I (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2009); U.S. I. Monk, 2009 WL 2567831, fn. I (E.D. Cal. Aug. IS, 2009); U.S. I. Zane, 2009 WL 2567832, fn.l (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18 2009). In each of these cases, the referenced footnote states — Prior to July 27, 2006, the last sentence in Section §2255(a) read "Any person as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than $50,000 in value." Under the civil statute, the minimum restitution amount for any violation of Section 2252 (the predicate act at issue) is $150,000 for violations occurring after July 27, 2006 and $50,000 for violations occurring prior to $50,000. Even with the typo (the extra "$50,000") at the end of the quoted sentence, it is clear that the Court applied the statute in effect at the time of the alleged criminal conduct constituting one of the statutorily enumerated predicate acts, which is consistent with applicable law discussed more fully below herein. It is an axiom of law that "retroactivity is not favored in the law." Bowen, 488 U.S., at 208, 109 S.Ct., at 471 (1988). As eloquently stated in Landgraf I. USI Film Products 114 S.Ct. 1483, 1497, 511 U.S. 244, 265-66 (1994): ... the presumption against retroactive legislation is deeply rooted in our jurisprudence, and embodies a legal doctrine centuries older than our Republic. Elementary considerations of fairness dictate that individuals should have an opportunity to know what the law is and to conform their conduct accordingly; settled 13 EFTA00233502

expectations should not be lightly disrupted .pus For that reason, the "principle that the legal effect of conduct should ordinarily be assessed under the law that existed when the conduct took place has timeless and universal appeal." Kaiser, 494 U.S., at 855, 110 S.Ct., at 1586 (SCALIA, J., concurring). In a free, dynamic society, creativity in both commercial and artistic endeavors is fostered by a rule of law that gives people confidence about the legal consequences of their actions. FN18. See Genera! Motors Corp. Romein, 503 U.S. 181, 191, 112 S.C. 1105, 1112, 117 L.Ed.2d 328 (1992) ("Retroactive legislation presents problems of unfairness that are more serious than those posed by prospective legislation, because it can deprive citizens of legitimate expectations and upset settled transactions"); (Further citations omitted]. It is therefore not surprising that the antiretroactivity principle finds expression in several provisions of our Constitution. The Ex Post Facto Clause flatly prohibits retroactive application of penal legislation.FN19 Article I, § 10, cl. I, prohibits States from passing another type of retroactive legislation, laws "impairing the Obligation of Contracts." The Fifth Amendments Takings Clause prevents the Legislature (and other government actors) from depriving private persons of vested property rights except for a "public use" and upon payment of "just compensation." The prohibitions on "Bills of Attainder" in Art. I, §§ 9-10, prohibit legislatures from singling out disfavored persons and meting out summary punishment for past conduct. See, e.g., United States Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 456-462, 85 S.Ct. 1707, 1719-1722, 14 L.Ed.2d 484 (1965). The Due Process Clause also protects the interests in fir notice and repose that may be compromised by retroactive legislation; a justification sufficient to validate a statute's prospective applicagion under the Clause "may not suffice" to warrant its retroactive application. Usery Turner Elkhorn Mining Co., 428 U.S. 1, 17, 96 S.Ct. 2882, 2893, 49 L.Ed.2d 752 (1976). FNI9. Article I contains two Ex Post Facto Clauses, one directed to Congress (§ 9, cl. 3), the other to the States (§ 10, cl. I). We have construed the Clauses as applicable only to penal legislation. See Calder I Bull, 3 Dall. 386, 390-391, L.Ed. 648 (1798) (opinion of Chase, J.). These provisions demonstrate that retroactive statutes raise particular concerns. The Legislature's unmatched powers allow it to sweep away settled expectations suddenly and without individualized consideration. Its responsivity to political pressures poses a risk that it may be tempted to use retroactive legislation as a means of retribution against unpopular groups or ingividuals. As Justice Marshall observed in his opinion for *9498 the Court in Weaver I Graham, 450 U.S. 24, 101 S.Ct. 960, 67 L.Ed.2d 17 (1981), the Ex Post Facto Clause not only ensures that individuals have "fair warning" about the effect of criminal statutes, but also "restricts governmental power by restraining arbitrary and potentially vindictive legislation." Id.. at 28-29, 101 S.Ct., at 963-964 (citations omitted). FN10 FN20. See Richmond I J. A. Croton Co., 488 U.S. 469, 513-514, 109 S.Ct. 706, 732, 102 L.Ed.2d 854 (1989) ("Legislatures are primarily policymaking bodies that promulgate rules to govern future conduct. The constitutional prohibitions against the enactment of ex post facto laws and bills of attainder reflect a valid concern about. the use of the political process to punish or characterize past conduct of 14 EFTA00233503

private citizens. It is the judicial system, rather than the legislative process, that is best equipped to identify past wrongdoers and to fashion remedies that will create the conditions that presumably would have existed had no wrong been committed") (STEVENS, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment); James I United States, 366 U.S. 213, 247, n. 3, 81 S.Ct. 1052, 1052, n. 3, 6 L.Ed.2d 246 (1961) (retroactive punitive measures may reflect "a purpose not to prevent dangerous conduct generally but to impose by legislation a penalty against specific persons or classes of persons"). These well entrenched constitutional protections and presumptions against retroactive application of legislation establish that 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2005) in effect at the time of the alleged conduct applies to the instant action, and not the amended version. II. Not only is there no clear express intent stating that the statute is to apply retroactively, but applying the current version of the statute, as amended in 2006, would be in clear violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution as it would be applied to events occurring before its enactment and would increase the penalty or punishment for the alleged crime. U.S. Const. Art. 1, §9, cl. 3, §10, cl. 1. U.S. I. Seigel, 153 F.3d 1256 (1 11h Cir. 1998); U.S. Edwards, 162 F.3d 87 (3d Cir. 1998); and generally, Calder Bull, 3 U.S. 386, 390, I L.Ed. 648, 1798 WL 587 (Calder) (1798). The United States Constitution provides that "[n]a Bill of Attainder or cx post facto Law shall be passed" by Congress. U.S. Const. art. I, § 9, cl. 3. A law violates the Ex Post Facto Clause if it " `appli[es] to events occurring before its enactment ... [and] disadvantage[s] the offender affected by it' by altering the definition of criminal conduct or increasing the punishment for the crime." Lynce Mathis 519 U.S. 433, 117 S.Ct. 891, 137 L.F,d.2d 63 (1997) (quoting Weaver Graham 450 U.S. 24, 29, 101 S.Ct. 960, 67 L.Ed.2d 17 (1981)). U.S. I. Siegel,153 F.3d 1256, 1259 (11th Cir. 1998). §2255 is contained in Title 18 of the United States Codes - "Crimes and Criminal Procedure, Part 1. Crimes, Chap. 110. Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children." 18 U.S.C. §2255 (2005), is entitled Civil remedy for personal injuries, and imposes a presumptive minimum of damages in the amount of $50,000, should Plaintiff prove any 15 EFTA00233504

violation of the specified criminal statutes and that she suffered personal injury and sustained actual damages. Thus, the effect of the 2006 amendments, effective July 27, 2006, would be to triple the amount of the statutory minimum previously in effect during the time of the alleged acts. The statute, as amended in 2006, contains no language stating that the application is to be retroactive. Thus, them is no manifest intent that the statute is to apply retroactively, and, accordingly, the statute in effect during the time of the alleged conduct is to apply. Landgraf USI Film Products supra, at 1493, ("A statement that a statute will become effective on a certain date does not even arguably suggest that it has any application to conduct that occurred at an earlier date."). This statute was enacted as part of the Federal Criminal Statutes targeting sexual predators and sex crimes against children. H.R. 3494, "Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act of 1998;" House Report No. 105-557, 11, 1998 U.S.C.A.N. 678, 679 (1998). Quoting from the "Background and Need For Legislation" portion of the I louse Report No. 105-557, 11-16, H.R. 3494, of which 18 U.S.C. §2255 is included, is described as "the most comprehensive package of new crimes and increased penalties ever developed in response to crimes against children, particularly assaults facilitated by computers." Further showing that §2255 was enacted as a criminal penalty or punishment, "Title II — Punishing Sexual Predators," Sec. 206, from House Report No. 105-557, 5-6, specifically includes reference to the remedy created under §2255 as an additional means of punishing sexual predators, along with other penalties and punishments. Senatorial Comments in amending §2255 in 2006 confirm that the creation of the presumptive minimum damage amount is meant as an additional penalty against 16 EFTA00233505

those who sexually exploit or abuse children. 2006 WL 2034118, 152 Cong. Rec. S8012- 02. Senator Kerry refers to the statutorily imposed damage amount as "penalties." Id. The cases of U.S. I. Siegel, supra (I I's Cir. 1998), and U.S. . Edwards supra (3d Cir. 1998), also support Defendant's position that application of the current version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 would be in clear violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause. In Siegel, the Eleventh Circuit found that the Ex Post Facto Clause barred application of the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act of 1996 (MVRA) to the defendant whose criminal conduct occurred before the effective date of the statute, 18 U.S.C. §3664(0(1)(A), even though the guilty plea and sentencing proceeding occurred after the effective date of the statute. On July 19, 1996, the defendant Siegel pleaded guilty to various charges under 18 U.S.C. §371 and §1956(a)(I)(A), (conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, bank fraud, and laundering of money instruments; and money laundering). He was sentenced on March 7, 1997. As part of his sentence, Siegel was ordered to pay $1,207,000.00 in restitution under the MVRA which became effective on April 24, 1996. Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214, 1229-1236. The 1996 amendments to MVRA required that the district court must order restitution in the full amount of the victim's loss without consideration of the defendant's ability to pay. Prior to the enactment of the MVRA and under the former 18 U.S.C. §3664(a) of the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982 (VWI'A), Pub.l. No. 97-291, 96 Stat. 1248, the court was required to consider, among other factors, the defendant's ability to pay in determining the amount of restitution. When the MVRA was enacted in 1996, Congress stated that the amendments to the VWPA "shall, to the extent constitutionally permissible, be effective for sentencing proceedings in cases in which the defendant is convicted on or after the date of enactment 17 EFTA00233506

of this Act [Apr. 24, 1996]." Siegel, supra at 1258. The alleged crimes occurred between February, 1988 to May, 1990. The Court agreed with the defendant's position that 1996 MVRA "should not be applied in reviewing the validity of the court's restitution order because to do so would violate the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution. See U.S. Const. art I, §9, cl. 3." The Ex Post Facto analysis made by the Eleventh Circuit in Siegel is applicable to this action. In resolving the issue in favor of the defendant, the Court first considered whether a restitution order is a punishment. Id, at 1259. In determining that restitution was a punishment, the Court noted that §3663A(a)(I) of Title 18 expressly describes restitution as a "penalty." In addition, the Court also noted that "[allthough not in the context of an ex post facto determination, ... restitution is a 'criminal penalty meant to have strong deterrent and rehabilitative effect.' United States Twitty 107 F.3d 1482, 1493 n. 12 (11th Cir.1997)." Second the Court considered "whether the imposition of restitution under the MVRA is an increased penalty as prohibited by the Ex Post Facto Clause." Id, at 1259. In determining that the application of the 1996 MVRA would indeed run afoul of the Constitution's Ex Post Facto Clause, the Court agreed with the majority of the Circuits that restitution under the 1996 MVRA was an increased penalty.? "The effect of the MVRA can be detrimental to a defendant. Previously, after considering the defendant's financial condition, the court had the discretion to order restitution in an amount less than the loss sustained by the victim. Under the MVRA, however, the court The Eleventh Circuit, in holding that "the MVRA cannot be applied to a person whose criminal conduct occurred prior to April 24, 1996," was "persuaded by the majority of districts on this issue." "Restitution is a criminal penalty carrying with it characteristics of criminal punishment." Siegel, supra at 1260. The Eleventh Cir iit is in agreement with the Second, Third, Eighth, Ninth, and D.C. Circuits. See U.S. . Futrell 209 F.3d 1286, 1289-90 (1 Oh Cir. 2000). 18 EFTA00233507

must order restitution to each victim in the full amount." Id, at 1260. See also U.S. I. Edwards 162 F.2d 87 (3rd Circuit 1998). In the instant case, in answering the first question, it is clear that that imposition of a minimum amount of damages, regardless of the amount of actual damages suffered by a minor victim, is meant to be a penalty or punishment. See statutory text and House Bill Reports, cited above herein, consistently referring to the presumptive minimum damages amount under §2255 as "punishment" or "penalties." According to the Ex Post Facto doctrine, although §2255 is labeled a "civil remedy," such label is not dispositive; "if the effect of the statute is to impose punishment that is criminal in nature, the cx post facto clause is implicated." See generally, Roman Catholic Bishop of Oakland'. Superior Court, 28 Cal.Rptr.3d 355, at 360, citing Kansas'. I Icndricks, 521 U.S. 346, 360-61 (1997). The effect of applying the 2006 version of §2255 would be to triple the amount of the presumptive minimum damages to a minor who proves the elements of her §2255 claim. The fact that a plaintiff proceeding under §2255 has to prove a violation of a criminal statute and suffer personal injury to recover damages thereunder, further supports that the imposition of a minimum amount, regardless of a victim's actual damages sustained, is meant and was enacted as additional punishment or penalty for violation of criminal sexual exploitation and abuse of minors. Accordingly, this Court is required to apply the statute in effect at the time of the alleged criminal acts. Not only is there no language in the 2006 statute stating that it is to apply retroactively, but further, such application of the 2006 version of 18 U.S.C. §2255 to acts that occurred prior to its effective date would have a detrimental and punitive 19 EFTA00233508

effect on Defendant by tripling the presumptive minimum of damages available to a plaintiff, regardless of the actual damages suffered.8 C. As discussed above, 18 U.S.C. §2255 was enacted as part of the criminal statutory scheme to punish and penalize those who sexually exploit and abuse minors, and thus, the Ex Post Fact Clause prohibits a retroactive application of the 2006 amended version. Even if one were to argue that the statute is "civil" and the damages thereunder are "civil" in nature, under the analysis provided by the United States Supreme Court in Landgraf I USI Film Products 511 U.S. 244, 114 S.Ct. 1483 (1994), pertaining to civil statutes, not only is there no express intent by Congress to apply the new statute to past conduct, but also, the clear effect of retroactive application of the statute would be to increase the potential liability for past conduct from a minimum of $50,000 to $150,000, and thus in violation of the constitutional prohibitions against such application. As noted, 18 U.S.C. §2255 is entitled "Civil remedy for personal injuries." Notwithstanding this label, the statute was enacted as part of the criminal statutory scheme to punish those who sexually exploit and abuse minors. Regardless of the actual damages suffered or proven by a minor, as long as a minor proves violation of a specified statutory criminal act under §2255 and personal injury, the defendant is held liable for the statutory imposed minimum. Notwithstanding the above legal analysis, in the recent case of Individual Known to Defendant As 08M1ST096.JPG and 08mist067.iog Falso, 2009 WI, 4807537 (N.D. N.Y. Dec. 9, 2009), United States District Court for the Northern District of New York Plaintiff has attempted to allege 6 counts pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2255. If it is Plaintiff's position that she is entitled to the minimum damage amount on each count, regardless of her actual damages, the absurdity of a retroactive application is more magnified. Clearly, the result is an unconstitutional increase in either a penalty or civil liability. 20 EFTA00233509

addressed the issue of whether §2255 is a civil or criminal statute for purposes of the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. The New York Court stated that "looking to the plain language of §2255(a), it is clear that the statutory intent was to provide a civil remedy. This is exemplified by the title ... and the fact that the statute aims to provide compensation to individuals who suffered personal injury as a result of criminal conduct against them." The New York Court in analyzing whether §2255 violated the Constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy, concluded that although the behavior to which §2255 is criminal, it did not find that the "primary aim" was "retribution and deterrence." "The statute serves civil goals." The "primary aim" is "the compensation for personal injuries sustained as a result of criminal conduct." Therefore, because Jane Doe 103 has invoked the provisions of the criminal Non- Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between EPSTEIN and USAO (see paragraphs 25 and 26 of complaint), plaintiff cannot avoid the full protection of the rule of lenity and due process to which EPSTEIN is entitled in the context of these unique factual circumstances. Although there does not exist any definitive ruling of whether the damages awarded under §2255 are meant as criminal punishment or a civil damages award, Defendant is still entitled to a determination as a matter of law that the statute in effect at the time of the alleged criminal conduct applies. As explained by the Landgraf court, supra at 280, and at 1505,9 9 In Landaraf the United States Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals and refused to apply new provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to conduct occurring before the effective date of the Act. 'Ile Court determined that statutory text in question, §102, was subject to the presumption against statutory retroactivity. 21 EFTA00233510

When a case implicates a federal statute enacted after the events in suit, the court's first task is to determine whether Congress has expressly prescribed the statute's proper reach. If Congress has done so, of course, there is no need to resort to judicial default rules. When, however, the statute contains no such express command, the court must determine whether the new statute would have retroactive effect, i.e., whether it would impair rights a party possessed when he acted, increase a party's liability for past conduct, or impose new duties with respect to transactions already completed. if the statute would operate retroactively, our traditional presumption teaches that it does not govern absent clear congressional intent favoring such a result. Here, there is no clear expression of intent regarding the 2006 Act's application to conduct occurring well before its enactment. Clearly, however, as discussed in part B herein, the presumptive minimum amount of damages of $150,000 was enacted as a punishment or penalty upon those who sexually exploit and abuse minors. See discussion of House Bill Reports and Congressional background above herein. The amount triples the previous amount for which a defendant might be found liable, regardless of the amount of actual damages a plaintiff has suffered and proven. The new statute imposes a substantial increase in the monetary liability for past conduct. As stated in Landgraf, "the extent of a party's liability, in the civil context as well as the criminal, is an important legal consequence that cannot be ignored." Courts have consistently refused to apply a statute which substantially increases a party's liability to conduct occurring before the statute's enactment. Landgraf, supra at 284-85. Even if plaintiff were to argue that retroactive application of the new statute "would vindicate its purpose more fully," even that consideration is not enough to rebut the presumption against retroactivity. Id, at 285-86. "The presumption against statutory retroactivity is founded upon sound considerations of general policy and practice, and accords with long held and widely shared expectations about the usual operation of legislation." Id. Thus, Plaintiff's action should be dismissed and she should be required to plead her action under the applicable version of 18 U.S.C. §2255. 22 EFTA00233511

Motion For More Definite Statement and To Strike, Rule 12(e) and (f), F.R.C.P. As noted above, Plaintiff alleges that she was 17 year old high school student as of January, 2004, and that the alleged conduct involving EPSTEIN occurred "between approximately January 2004 and May 2005. Thus, Plaintiff had to be 18 (no longer a minor) by January of 2005. Under the principles of statutory construction, the language of §2255(a) is clear — "Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section ...of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than $50,000 in value." As Plaintiff's date of birth is significant to her §2255 claim, she should be required to more definitely state her date of birth so that Defendant and this Court are able to determine precisely when she reached the age of majority. (The age of majority under both federal and state law is 18 years old. See 18 U.S.C. §2256(1), defining a "minor" as "any person under the age of eighteen years;" and §I.01, Definitions, Fla. Stat., defining "minor" to include "any person who has not attained the age of 18 years.") In addition, when Plaintiff reached the age of majority may impact her ability to even assert a §2255 claim. See §2255(b). To the extent that Plaintiff is relying on any alleged conduct that occurred after her 18 birthday as an element of her §2255 claim, such allegations should be stricken as immaterial and she should be required to more definitely state the dates of the alleged conduct. See Rule 12(0. Defendant also seeks to strike 1[110, I I, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16, 23 EFTA00233512

of Plaintiff's Complaint as immaterial and impertinent. None of the allegations in those paragraphs specifically pertain to the Plaintiff. Not until ¶17 does Plaintiff assert allegations pertaining to her and the conduct of Defendant directly involving her. What EPSTEIN may or may not have allegedly done with respect to other alleged girls does not effect Plaintiff's claim brought pursuant to §2255. The allegations in ¶¶10-16 are not related to the elements of Plaintiff's §2255 claim and, thus, are required to be stricken. Conclusion Pursuant to the above, Plaintiff entire action is required to be dismissed. 18 U.S.C. §2255 allows for a single recovery of the actual damages sustained in proven; neither the "actual damages" sustained not the statutory minimum is subject to duplication or multiplication on a per violation or per count or per incident basis. Also, the statute in effect during the time of the alleged conduct applies, not the version as amended, effective July 27, 2006. Count VI is also required to be dismissed as it relies on a statutory predicate act that did not take effect until 2006. In addition, Plaintiff should be required to more definitely state her date of birth, and any conduct occurring after her 18th birthday should be stricken, and 1110 - 16 of the Complaint should also be stricken. WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that this Court dismiss the entire action against him, and further grant his motion for more definite statement and to strike. Robert D. Critton, Esq. Attorney for Defendant Certificate of Service I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is 24 EFTA00233513

being served this day on all counsel of record identified on the following Service List in the manner specified by CM/ECF on this day of 2010. Robert C. Josefsberg, Esq. Jack Alan Goldberger, Esq. Katherine W. Ezell, Es Atterbury Goldberger & Weiss, P.A. e 800 ounse or amt 12 Counsel for Defendant Jeffity Epstein Respectfully submitted, By: ROBERT D. CRITFON, JR., ESQ. ounse or Pe en ant e rey pstein 18 USCA 62255 (1999-July 26. 2006): PART I--CRIMES CHAPTER 110—SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND OTHER ABUSE OF CHILDREN § 2255. Civil remedy for personal injuries (a) Any minor who is a victim of a violation of section 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A. 2252, 2252A. 2260 2421 2422 or AZ 21 of this title 25 EFTA00233514

and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such minor sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any minor as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than $50,000 in value. (b) Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. CREDIT(S) (Added Pub.L. 99-500, Title I. 6 101(b) [Title VII, § 703(a)), Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783-75, and amended Pub.L. 99-591. Title I. § 101(b) [Title VII, § 703(a)], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341-75; Pub.L. 105-314, Title VI. § 605 Oct. 30, 1998, 112 Stat. 2984.) 18 U.S.C. 62255, as amended 2006. Effective July 27, 2006: PART I--CRIMES CHAPTER 110-SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND OTHER ABUSE OF CHILDREN § 2255. Civil remedy for personal injuries (a) In general.--Any person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violation of section 2241(4 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A 2252 2252A 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of this title and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation, regardless of whether the injury occurred while such person was a minor, may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such person sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any person as described in the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than $150,000 in value. (b) Statute of limitations.--Any action commenced under this section shall be barred unless the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action first accrues or in the case of a person under a legal disability, not later than three years after the disability. CREDIT(S) (Added Pub.L. 99-500. Title I. § 101(b) [Title VII, § 703(a)), Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783-75, and amended Pub.L. 99-591. Title 1, 4 101(b) [Title VII, § 703(a)), Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341-75; pub.L. 105-314. Title VI. 4 605 26 EFTA00233515

Oct. 30, 1998, 112 Stat. 2984; Pub.L. 109-248, Title VII, & 707(b). (c), July 27, 2006, 120 Stat. 650.) 2 Paragraphs 30, 34, 38, 43, 48, and 52 of Plaintiff's Complaint alleges: 30. As a direct and proximate result of the offenses enumerated in 18 U.S.C. §2255 being committed against the then minor Plaintiff by Defendant, Plaintiff has in the past suffered, and will in the future continue to suffer, physical injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, psychological and/or psychiatric trauma, mental anguish, humiliation, confusion, embarrassment, loss of educational opportunities, loss of self-esteem, loss of dignity, invasion of her privacy, separation from her family, and other damages associated with Defendant manipulating and leading her into a perverse and unhealthy way of life. The then minor Plaintiff incurred medical and psychological expenses, and Plaintiff will in the future suffer additional medical and psychological expenses. Plaintiff has suffered a loss of income, a loss of the capacity to earn income in the future, and a loss of the capacity to enjoy life. These injuries are permanent in nature, and Plaintiff will continue to suffer these losses in the future. The "Wherefore" clauses in each of the six counts are also identical — WHEREFORE Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for all damages available under 18 U.S.C. §2255, including, without limitation, actual and compensatory damages, attorney's fees, costs of suit, and such other relief this Court deems just and proper, and hereby demands trial by jury on all issues triable as of right by a jury. 27 EFTA00233516

EFTA00233517

- Not an Official Document Page 1 of 24 Report SelectioriCriteria Case ID: Docket Start Date: Docket Ending Date: Case Description Case ID: Case Caption: Division: Filing Date: Court: Location: Jury: Type: Status: 502006CF009454AXXXMB 502006CF009454AXXXMB EPSTEIN, JEFFREY W - COLBATH Wednesday, July 19th, 2006 CF -FELONY MB - MAIN BRANCH N-Non Jury CF -FELONY CLSD - CLOSED CASE Related Cases No related cases were found. Case Event Schedule Event Date/Time Room Location Judge/Commissioner CASE DISPOSITION MAIN BRANCH COURTROOM 11F COLBATH, JUDGE JEFFREY CASE DISPOSITION MAIN BRANCH COURTROOM] 11F COLBATH, JUDGE JEFFREY Case Parties Expn Date Type ID Name DEFENDANT 24167391 EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E. Aliases: none 3 1 22-AUG- ATTORNEY ATTY MALINSKI, NORMAN 2006 Aliases: none hup://courtcon.co.palm-beach.flais/p1s/jiwp/ek_public_qry_docup_dktrpt_docket_report?e... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233518

- Not an Official Document JUDGE Page 2 of 24 COLBATH, JUDGE Aliases: none JEFFREY 1 30-JUN- 2008 ATTORNEY 0262013 GOLDBERGER ESQ, JACK A Aliases: none Docket Entries Docket Number Docket Type Book and Page No. Attached To: ZCAPS - CONVERSION 1ST CAPIAS ISS DATE Filing Date: 17-JUL-2006 -1 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: PerSchedule Tracking# 324329 ZINFO - DATE CONVERSION INFO FILING Filing Date: 19-JUL-2006 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 1 JIDV - DOCKET HISTORY Filing Date: 19-JUL-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: ARREST WARRANT DIVISION W ORDERED BY JUDGE KROLL ON 071706. ISSUED ON 071706. BOND SET PER SCHEDULE. 2 JIDV - DOCKET HISTORY Filing Date: 19-JUL-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: INDICTMENT. 2 A JIDV - DOCKET HISTORY lutp://courtcon.co.palm-beach.fLus/p1s/jiwp/ck_public_qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?c... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233519

- Not an Official Document Page 3 of 24 Filing Date: 23-JUL-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: ARREST RECORD. 3 JIDV - DOCKET HISTORY Filing Date: 25-JUL-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: CASH BOND. BOND POSTED ON 072306 RECEIPT: 00073142 BOND AMT $3000 ---am• 4 I JIDV - DOCKET HISTORY -----ii m, Filing Date: 27-JUL-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: NOTICE OF ARRAIGNMENT. 5 JIDV - DOCKET HISTORY Filing Date: 16-AUG-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY FILED BY L. BELOHLAVEK,ASA.BH 6 JIDV - DOCKET HISTORY Filing Date: 22-AUG-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE, WAIVER OF ARRAIGNMENT, PLEA OF NOT GUILTY AND REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL FILED BY JACK GOLDBERGER. BH JIFM - MISD/FELONY HISTORY RECORD Filing Date: 06-OCT-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: JIFM JUDICIAL INFORMATION FELONY RECORD WRITTEN NG PLEA: 08/22/06 CONFLICT Case: N DOWN-FILED To: FEE Case: N PTI Date: REOPEN: N PTI Reject: N Date: COMMENTS: None http://courtcon.co.palm-beach.fl.us/p1s/jiwp/ek_public_qry_doet.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?e... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233520

- Not an Official Document Page 4 of 24 FAHIS - HISTORY FELONY/MISD ARRAIGN Filing Date: 06-OCT-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: X/JIFA FELONY-MISDEMEANOR IS EPSTEIN JEFFREY E LEGACY 41673917332767 PRAECIPE AND 082206 DATE: JUDGE: COURT: DEFENDANT PRESENT: PLEA: ARRAIGNMENT PASSED TO: DATE: RELEASED, FAILURE OF STATE !COMMENTS: None ARRAIGNMENT RECORD DEF CASE NUMBER: WAIVER FILED BY: DATE: DEFENSE ATTY: PD APPT: ADVISED OF RIGHTS: TIME: COURT: DEFENDANT TO FILE DATE: PTI DATE: CALHS - CALENDAR HISTORY Filing Date: 06-OCT-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 08/25/06 0845 CLDR= F DIV= AW 082506 RESET TO 0000 DIV: REMARKS: PRAECIPE FOR APPEARANCE FILE TO JUDGE FOR DATE (D/ARS) ARRAIGNMENT DELETED- ON (CR-DAMES)-, & WAIVER FILED ON 02206-SEND 7 JDN - JUDICIAL NOTES Filing Date: 16-NOV-2006 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: SETTING CASE FOR CASE DISPOSITION ON 12/8/06 @ 8:30 A.M. EVSCH SCHEDULED - HEARING EVENT Filing Date: 30-NOV-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: none. 8 NOH - NOTICE OF HEARING Filing Date: 04-DEC-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: Docket entry for the letter produced by LPRATTS. from CSAEOUT on 04-DEC-2006 http://courtcon.co.palm-beach.fl.us/pIs/jiwp/ck_public gry_doct.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?c... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233521

- Not an Official Document Page 5 of 24 EVSCH - HEARING EVENT SCHEDULED Filing Date: 07-DEC-2006 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: none. EVCON - EVENT CONTINUED Filing Date: Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 07 DEC-2006 EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E AGREED ORDER CONTINUING CASE DISPO. 9 WST - WAIVER OF SPEEDY TRIAL Filing Date: I07-DEC-2006 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 10 Filing Date: FILED BY JACK GOLDBERGER (D/ARS) AGOR - AGREED ORDER 07-DEC-2006 Filing Party: EPSTEIN JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 11 (JUDGE MCSORLEY) CONTINUING CASE DISPO PRESENTLY SCHEDULED 08-DEC AT 0830AM TO 08-MARCH-2007 AT 0830AM. RMAL - RETURNED MAIL Filing Date: Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 1 11-DEC-2006 EPSTEIN. JEFFREY E UNABLE TO FORWARD NOUN - NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY Filing Date: 21-FEB-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 07-18 THRU 7-20 FILED BY ASA EVSCH - HEARING EVENT SCHEDULED http://courtcon.co.palm-beach.fl.us/p1s/jiwp/ck_public_qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?c... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233522

- Not an Official Document Page 6 of 24 Filing Date: 05-MR-2007 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: none. EVRST - EVENT RESET Filing Date: 05-MAR-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: AGREED ORDER CONTINUING CASE DISPO 13 AGOR - AGREED ORDER Filing Date: 05-MAR-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E IRisposition Amount: Docket Text: I(JUDGE MCSORLEY) CONTINUING CASE DISPO PREVIOUSLY- 1 SET FOR 08-MAR-2007 AND RESETTING FOR CASE DISPO ON 16-MAY-2007 AT 0830AM. 14 NOH - NOTICE OF HEARING Filing Date: 07-MAR-2007 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: Docket entry for the letter produced from CSAEOUT on 07-MAR- 2007 by DFELDER. 15 NOUN - NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY Filing Date: 12-APR-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: FILED BY ASA 4-30 THRU 05-04 EVCON - EVENT CONTINUED Filing Date: 11-MAY-2007 Filing Party: 1 EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: AGREED ORDER CONTINUING 16 AGOR - AGREED ORDER Filing Date: 11-MAY-2007 i http://courtcon.co.palm-beachnus/p1s/jiwp/ck_public_qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?c... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233523

- Not an Official Document Page 7 of 24 Filing Party: 'EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: (JUDGE MCSORLEY) CONTINUING CASE DISPO FROM 16-MAY- 2007 TO 16-NOV-2007 AT 0830AM. EVSCH SCHEDULED HEARING EVENT Filing Date: 14-MAY-2007 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: !none. EVSCH SCHEDULED - HEARING EVENT Filing Date: 15-MAY-2007 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: fipone. EVCAN CANCELLED/SETTLED - EVENT Filing Date: 15-MAY-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: CANCEL 051607/ADD TO CALENDAR 111607-PER J.A NOTE FILED 051507 (D/ARS) 17 f JDN - JUDICIAL NOTES Filing Date: 15-MAY-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: FROM J.A.CANCEL FROM 051607/ADD TO CALENDAR 111607, 0830AM FOR CASE DISPOSITION FILED (D/ARS) 18 I NOH - NOTICE OF HEARING Filing Date: '] 16-MAY-2007 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: Docket entry for the letter produced from CSAEOUT on 16-MAY- 2007 by DFELDER. 19 NOUN - NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY] http://courtcon.co.palm-beach.fl.us/p1s/jiwp/ck_public_qry doct.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?c... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233524

- Not an Official Document Page 8 of 24 Filing Date: 25-JUL-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 8-22 THRU 24 FILED BY ASA 20 NOUN - NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY Filing Date: 08-AUG-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: FILED BY ASA 21 I NOUN - NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY Filing Date: 12-SEP-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 9-18 THRU 20 FILED BY ASA 22 NOUN - NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY Filing Date: 01-OCT-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 10-09 THRU 12 FILED BY ASA EVCAN CANCELLED/SETTLED - EVENT 30-OCT-2007 Filing Date: Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: none. EVSCH SCHEDULED HEARING EVENT Filing Date: 30-OCT-2007 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: none. 23 AGOR - AGREED ORDER Filing Date: 30-OCT-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E http://courtcon.co.palm-beach.fl.us/pls/jiwpick_public_qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?e... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233525

- Not an Official Document Page 9 of 24 'Disposition Amount: Docket Text: (JUDGE MCSORLEY) SCHEDULING CASE FOR TRIAL - CANCELLING CASE FOR 11/16/07 @ 8:30 AM FOR CASE DISPOSITION AND SETTING FOR 1/07/08 @ 9:00 AM FOR JURY TRIAL 24 JJDN - JUDICIAL NOTES Filing Date: 30-OCT-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: CASE CANCELLED FOR 11/16/07 @ 8:30 AM FOR CASE DISPO AND 11/20/07 @ 8:30 AM FOR PLEA CONFERENCE ( NOT SCHEDULED) 25 NOH - NOTICE OF HEARING Filing Date: 06-NOV-2007 Filing Party: i Disposition Amount: Text: Docket entry for the letter produced from CSAEOUT on 06-NOV- 2007 Docket by DFELDER. 26 i NOH - NOTICE OF HEARING Filing Date: 10-DEC-2007 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Tex • SETTING CASE FOR 1/04/08 FOR PLEA CONFERENCE - FILED BY J. GOLBERGER EVSCH SCHEDULED HEARING EVENT Filing Date: 11-DEC-2007 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 'none. 27 MOT - MOTION Filing Date: 02-JAN-2008 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: i AGREED MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL - FILED BY J. GOLDBERGER I I http://courtcon.co.palm-beachltus/p1s/jiwp/ck_public qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?c... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233526

- Not an Official Document Page 10 of 24 EVSCH - HEARING EVENT SCHEDULED Filing Date: 03-JAN-2008 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: Docket Text: none. EVCAN - EVENT CANCELLED/SETTLED Filing Date: 03-JAN-2008 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: none. EVCAN - EVENT CANCELLED/SETTLED Filing Date: 03-JAN-2008 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: none. 28 LTR LETTER Filing Date: I03-JAN-2008 Filing Party: IEPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: 29 Filing Date: [FIling Party: Disposition Amount: TO JUDGE MCSORLEY FROM JACK A. GOLDBERGER RE: AGREED MOTION TO CONTINUE. MOT - MOTION 03-JAN-2008 Docket Text: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E AGREED MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL FILED BY JACK A. GOLDBERGER. 30 jAGOR - AGREED ORDER Filing Date: 03-JAN-2008 Filing Party: Disposition Amount: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E (JUDGE MCSORLEY) CONTINUING TRIAL FROM 07-JAN-2008, http://courtcon.co.palm-beach.fl.us/pls/jiwp/ck_public_qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_docket_report?c... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233527

- Not an Official Document Page 11 of 24 Docket Text: CANCELLING PLEA CONFERENCE SETTING CASE FOR A STATUS 08:30AM. ON 04-JAN-2008 AND CHECK ON 10-MAR-2008 AT 31 NOH - NOTICE OF HEARING Filing Date: 28-JAN-2008 Filing Party: 1 Disposition Amount: Docket Text: Docket entry for the letter produced by VBUCKLEY. from CSAEOUT on 28-JAN-2008 32 IDEPO - DEPOSITION Filing Date: 31-JAN-2008 Filing Party: EPSTEIN JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: (NOTICE OF) FILED BY J. GOLDBERGER 32 A I MEP() - ORDER MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE Filing Date: 06-FEB-2008 I Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: FILED BY THEODORE LEOPOLD 33 MFPO - ORDER MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE Filing Date: 07-FEB-2008 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: FILED BY THEODORE LEOPOLD, ESQ. 34 ORD - ORDER Filing Date: 07-FEB-2008 Filing Party: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY E Disposition Amount: Docket Text: (JUDGE MCSORLEY) ATTORNEY IN WRITING TO SAID MOTION THIS ORDER, COURTESY COPY SUBMITTED TO UNDERSIGNED'S FOR DEFT SHALL RESPOND W/IN 5 DAYS FROM DATE OF OF SAME SHALL BE CHAMBERS. 34 A IRESP - RESPONSE TO: Filing Date: 08-FEB-2008 http://courtcon.co.palm-beach.fl.us/pls/jiwp/ck_public_qry_doct.cp_dktpt_docket_report?c... 8/4/2009 EFTA00233528