Case 9:03-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/0212017 Page 1 of 176 GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT EFTA00799605

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 2 of 176 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Matthewman JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. DECLARATION OF A. MARIE VILLAFANA IN SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE AND OPPOSITION TO PETITIONERS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT I. I, A. Marie Villafatia, do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. I graduated from the University of California at Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall) in 1993. After serving as a judicial clerk to the Hon. David F. Levi in Sacramento, California, I was admitted to practice in California in 1995. I also am admitted to practice in all courts of the states of Minnesota and Florida, the Eighth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of Florida, the District of Minnesota, and the Northern District of California. My bar admission status in California and Minnesota is currently inactive. I am currently employed as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida and was so employed during all of the events described herein. 2. I am the Assistant United States Attorney who was assigned to the investigation of EFTA00799606

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 3 of 176 Jeffrey Epstein. For purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(5), I was the "attorney for the Government," although, as discussed below, no federal criminal charges were ever filed and there was no "case," as that term is used in the statute. I have previously filed two Declarations (see DE14 and DE35). This Declaration repeats some of the information contained in the earlier Declarations for ease of reference. 3. The federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein was handled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"). The federal investigation was initiated in 2006 at the request of the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD") into allegations that Jeffrey Epstein and his personal assistants had used facilities of interstate commerce to induce young girls between the ages of thirteen and seventeen to engage in prostitution, amongst other offenses. 4. Although the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("the Office") opened the matter to conduct an investigation and to evaluate a possible prosecution, the Office never accepted the matter for federal prosecution, that is, the Office never authorized the presentation of a proposed indictment to a federal grand jury or the filing of any federal charge in a criminal complaint or information, and no case was ever filed. 5. Throughout the investigation, the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist and I prepared and provided victim notification letters. (See Exs. & F). Letters to reported victims were prepared early in the investigation and subsequently delivered as each of those victims was contacted. The victim notification letters that were sent early in the investigation were sent to Exhibits designated by a number are attached to this Declaration. Exhibits designated by a letter are attached to the Government's Response and Opposition to Petitioners' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. 2 EFTA00799607

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 4 of 176 individuals who had been identified as potential victims of Epstein, but whom the investigative team had not yet interviewed and had not necessarily determined were in fact victims of a federal offense or came under the protection of the Crime Victims' Rights Act ("CVRA"). For example, the U.S. Attorney's Office letters were hand-delivered by FBI agents to Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 on dates subsequent to the dates of the letters. At the time those letters were sent, determinations had not yet been made that Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 were in fact victims of a federal offense or came under the protections of the CVRA. Nonetheless, the investigative team and I adopted an approach of providing more notice and assistance to potential victims than the CVRA may have required, even before the circumstances of those individuals had been fully investigated and before any charging decisions had been made. My letters to Jane Doe I and Jane Doe 2 notified them of their rights under the CVRA, including the right to confer with me and the right to seek counsel with respect to their CVRA rights. (Id.). My letters also contained my direct dial telephone number, the direct dial telephone number of the case agent, Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, and the telephone number for the Justice Department's Office for Victims of Crime. (Id.). Both Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 also received letters from the FBI's Victim-Witness Specialist, which were sent on January 10, 2008. (See Ex. J). Neither Jane Doe I nor Jane Doe 2 ever contacted me to discuss the investigation, potential charges or resolutions of the matter, or otherwise. If they had, I would have been happy to discuss the matter and provide their comments, concerns, or desires to my superiors. I never declined any victim's request to confer regarding any aspect of the investigation. 6. A subpoena was issued to Jane Doe 2 for testimony and documents in September, 2006. Within a few days, I was contacted by attorney James Eisenberg, who informed me that he 3 EFTA00799608

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 5 of 176 was representing Jane Doe 2. Mr. Eisenberg also informed me that Jane Doe 2 would not provide testimony or appear for a consensual interview unless the U.S. Attorney's Office obtained court- ordered use immunity for Jane Doe 2 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6001, et seq. See Ex. A. I had several oral and written communications with Mr. Eisenberg asking him if Jane Doe 2 would appear under the protection of a standard Kastigar letter, but he told me that Jane Doe 2 would only appear if statutory immunity pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6001 was received. For example, in my letter of January 24, 2007, I confirmed my earlier conversation where Mr. Eisenberg had advised that Jane Doe 2 intended "to invoke the Fifth Amendment if questioned," and that she "was unwilling to speak to [the investigative team] pursuant to a Kastigar letter." (See Ex. 1.) 7. In the same letter of January 24, 2007, I raised concerns regarding whether Mr. Eisenberg had a conflict of interest. (See id.) As noted in Jane Doe 2's Declaration, Mr. Eisenberg's fees were paid by Jeffrey Epstein, the target of the investigation. In response, Mr. Eisenberg wrote the attached letter dated February 1, 2007. (See Ex. 2.) Mr. Eisenberg stated that it was the attitude of the U.S. Attorney's Office, in which the "office refuses to accept the fact that it is [Jane Doe 2's] decision not to cooperate with the government that upsets her." (Id. at ¶ 1.) Mr. Eisenberg also assured me "that there is no conflict of interest in [his] representation of [Jane Doe 2]. In this case I have always been asked and always will exercise independent judgment to follow my client's independent will." (Id. at12.) Despite his expressed misgivings about the Palm Beach Police Department's handling of its investigation, Mr. Eisenberg stated that "[n]one of the above is directed at you personally. I want to repeat that you have always treated us with respect." (Id. at p. 2, final paragraph.) 4 EFTA00799609

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 6 of 176 8. In light of Mr. Eisenberg's representations that there was no conflict of interest, and in light of his clear statements that he represented Jane Doe 2, I could not directly contact or "confer" with Jane Doe 2 without running afoul of the Florida Bar rules (e.g., R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-4.2) and 28 U.S.0 § 530B. 9. I continued to converse with Mr. Eisenberg about having Jane Doc 2 appear for a voluntary interview, which continuously delayed the investigation. To that end, on February 5, 2007, I provided Mr. Eisenberg with two proposed Kastigar letters that I felt should assure Jane Doe 2 that she was being interviewed only as a witness and potential victim. (See Ex. 3.) At Jane Doe 2's request, I also prepared Office paperwork to obtain authorization for childcare while Jane Doe 2 was interviewed. (See Ex. 4.) 10. On February 12, 2007, after another conversation in which Mr. Eisenberg re- iterated Jane Doe 2's intent to invoke her Fifth Amendment privilege and Jane Doe 2's refusal to testify without 6001 immunity, Mr. Eisenberg provided, at my request, a letter detailing Jane Doe 2's concerns regarding testifying without immunity. (See Ex. 5.) In that letter, Mr. Eisenberg "reiterate[d] that [Jane Doe 2] will refuse to voluntarily cooperate with the federal government." Jane Doe 2 thereafter denied being involved in or a victim of any criminal activity and made statements meant to exculpate Jeffrey Epstein, including "[Jane Doe 2] never touched Mr. Epstein in a sexual way and Mr. Epstein never touched [Jane Doe 2] at all. At one point, Mr. Epstein did ask [Jane Doe 2] her age. [Jane Doe 2] insisted that she was eighteen years old." (See id.) Describing Jane Doe 2's position, Mr. Eisenberg wrote: "We believe no crime was committed." (See id.) 5 EFTA00799610

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 7 of 176 11. Based upon the proffer letter provided by Mr. Eisenberg, in March 2007, I prepared a Request for Authorization to Apply for a Compulsion Order seeking Immunity pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 6001-6003 for Jane Doe 2. On April 13, 2007, Bruce C. Swartz, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, approved the request, on behalf of Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney General. (See Ex. B.) I then applied to the Court for an Order compelling Jane Doe 2's testimony. U.S. District Judge Middlebrooks granted the application on April 16, 2007. (Ex. 6.) 12. After learning of Judge Middlebrooks' Order, Mr. Eisenberg asked whether Jane Doe 2 could appear for an interview, rather than provide formal testimony pursuant to her subpoena, so that he could be present. On April 24, 2007, Jane Doe 2 was interviewed; the interview was videotaped. (Ex. C.) During the interview, Jane Doe 2 again denied being involved in or a victim of any criminal activity and made statements meant to exculpate Jeffrey Epstein. (See id.) Jane Doe 2 also informed me and the FBI agents who were present that she "hope[d] . . . nothing happens to [Epstein] because he's an awesome man" and that she believed that it was "a shame that he has to go through this because-he's an awesome guy and he didn't do nothing wrong, nothing." (Id.) 13. Other than that interview, I had no direct contact with Jane Doe 2 during the course of the investigation. Jane Doe 2 never contacted me at all, either directly or through Mr. Eisenberg, whether seeking information; requesting to confer with me regarding the investigation, charging decisions, or the resolution of the matter; or complaining that she was not being treated with fairness and respect. 14. In light of other evidence and witness statements, the investigative team considered Jane Doe 2's exculpatory statements to be false. Nonetheless, those statements precluded us from 6 EFTA00799611

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 8 of 176 including her as a victim who would be referenced in any federal indictment. Despite this, in light of the investigative team's general approach to try to go above and beyond in terms of caring for the victims, I continued to treat her as a victim. In that vein, shortly after the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was signed, I contacted Mr. Eisenberg to ask whether he still represented Jane Doe 2. Mr. Eisenberg stated that he did. I then told him that we would soon be making victim notifications, and asked Mr. Eisenberg whether I could send the notification directly to Jane Doe 2, or if it had to be served through him. Mr. Eisenberg instructed me that any victim notification should be sent to him. 15. As explained in further detail below, after the NPA was signed, Mr. Epstein, through his counsel, made several attempts to avoid having to perform the obligations that he had undertaken in the NPA. Several of those attacks alleged prosecutorial misconduct by me, and Epstein's attorneys used my efforts to provide a post-NPA-signing victim notification to Jane Doe 2 as evidence of that claimed misconduct. (See, e.g., Ex. L.) In response to Mr. Leflcowitz's ruinous allegations against Jane Doe 2 and myself, on December 13, 2007, I sent a response to Mr. Lefkowitz defending myself and Jane Doe 2. (Ex. 7.) 16. During the course of the suit filed by Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, the Petitioners have alleged that the case agents, the U.S. Attorney's Office, and I personally committed acts that violated their rights under the CVRA. They have pointed to various pieces of correspondence with counsel for Epstein to suggest that the negotiations were not at arms' length or that certain things were done inappropriately in order to keep the victims from fording out about the NPA. Their interpretations and assertions are incorrect. 7 EFTA00799612

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 9 of 176 17. In the summer of 2007, Jeffrey Epstein, through his attorneys, and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("the Office") entered into negotiations to resolve the investigation. Prior to that, Epstein's attorneys had made several attempts to convince the Office to discontinue its investigation and not pursue any possible federal prosecution of Epstein. These attempts were rejected. At that time, Mr. Epstein had already been charged by the State of Florida with solicitation of prostitution, in violation of Florida Statutes § 796.07. Mr. Epstein's attorneys sought a global resolution of the matter. The Office instructed me to engage in negotiations to reach an agreement with Epstein to defer federal prosecution in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, so long as certain basic preconditions were met — Epstein would have to serve a jail sentence of two years (later reduced to 18 months), Epstein would have to register as a sex offender, and Epstein would have to accept liability to the victims identified in the federal investigation for damages in lieu of the restitution that would have been mandatory if Epstein had been convicted of the federal offenses under investigation. 18. Prior to the Office making its decision to direct me to engage in negotiations with Epstein's counsel, I discussed the strengths and weaknesses of the case with members of the Office's management and informed them that most of the victims had expressed significant concerns about having their identities disclosed. While I was not part of the final decision-making at the Office that arrived at the two-year sentence requirement, I was part of the discussions regarding sex offender registration and the restitution provision. It is my understanding from these and other discussions that these factors, that is, the various strengths and weaknesses of the case and the various competing interests of the many different victims (including the privacy concerns expressed by many), together with the Office's desire to obtain a guaranteed sentence of 8 EFTA00799613

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 10 of 176 incarceration for Epstein, the equivalent of uncontested restitution for the victims, and guaranteed sexual offender registration by Epstein to help protect other minors throughout the country in the future, were among the factors that informed the Office's discretionary decision to negotiate a resolution of the matter and to ultimately enter into the NPA. 19. After the fact, Petitioners are critical of the NPA's terms. They have alleged that Epstein would easily have been convicted and that all of the victims were eager to participate in a full-fledged federal prosecution. Alternatively, they have suggested that a successful federal prosecution could have been mounted based solely on Epstein's actions with Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2. As the prosecutor who handled the investigation, I can say that these contentions overlook the facts that existed at the time the NPA was negotiated. First, as set out above, Jane Doe 2 clearly stated her opposition to assisting the investigation, much less a prosecution. She was not alone. As noted in Special Agent Kuyrkendall's Declaration, many victims expressed reservations about assisting in the investigation. For example, Special Agent Timothy Slater described how one victim told him that she did not want to be bothered again, she had moved away to distance herself from the situation, and she wanted to "let this be in my past." (Ex. 8 at 1 7.) Similarly, the person whom Petitioners refer to as "Jane Doe 5" also had been approached by the investigative team in 2007 but refused to speak with them. (See D.E. 14 at 1 3.) Regardless of the perceived strength of the corroborating evidence, it was and remains my professional opinion as an experienced prosecutor that a successful prosecution would have required convincing all of the identified victims to come forward and speak publicly at a trial, knowing that they would face public scrutiny and withering cross-examination. Using my best efforts to accord all of the victims their right to be treated with fairness and with respect for their dignity and privacy, and in 9 EFTA00799614

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 11 of 176 the exercise of my prosecutorial discretion, I believed and still believe that a negotiated resolution of the matter was in the best interests of the Office and the victims as a whole. The Office had also reached that same conclusion. 20. Second, the suggestion that a successful prosecution could have been mounted naming only Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 as victims is overly optimistic at best. The investigative team and I worked tirelessly to put together the evidence nernsary to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Epstein committed federal offenses. We recognized how difficult a trial would be and that a successful case could be made only if a jury heard from a long series of credible victims, who did not know each other (to avoid an allegation of collusion) and who had all been subjected to the same treatment at Epstein's hands. A case involving just two victims who knew each other, including one who had previously stated — on videotape — that she never engaged in sexual contact with Epstein, would never have been charged as a federal case, must less resulted in a conviction. 21. Negotiations to resolve the Epstein matter were difficult, and it was not clear that they would be successfully completed. If Epstein did not enter an agreement with the Office, then the Office needed to be in the best position it could be to charge and convict him. Accordingly, I did not want to share with victims that the Office was attempting to secure for them the ability to obtain monetary compensation for the harm they had suffered. I was aware that, if I disclosed that and the negotiations fell through, Epstein's counsel would impeach the victims and my credibility by asserting that I had told victims they could receive money for implicating Epstein. In fact, Epstein's attorneys made exactly that claim in a deposition of one of the victims. (See Ex. 9 at 44-51.) Attorney Michael Tien, who represented Epstein, asked one of the identified victims the following questions: 10 EFTA00799615

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 12 of 176 TIEN: Now tell me about when the federal prosecutors told you about getting reimbursed. A: I have no idea what you're talking about. TIEN: Tell me about when the federal prosecutors spoke to you about getting money you feel you're entitled to from Mr. Epstein. A: I don't know what you're talking about. TIEN: Do you know who Marie Villafana is? A: No, sir. TIEN: Did you ever meet with any federal prosecutors? A: I think — yeah. I think they were — I think they were like FBI. TIEN: Uh-huh. Did you meet with federal prosecutors? A: They came to my house one time, yes. TIEN: When did they come to your house? A: Very long ago. TIEN: Was it this year, 2008? A: It was not this year, no. TIEN: Was it 2007? A: I'd have to say at least two years ago or a year ago, yeah. So it would be 2007, 2006; but it was a while ago. * * * TIEN: So if I say the name to you Marie Villafana, you don't know who that is? A: No, sir. TIEN: How many women and how many men came to your house? A: I want to say two ladies and two guys. TIEN: Did someone named Jeffrey Sloman come to your house? A: I don't know names, sir. 'HEN: Do you know who Jeffrey Sloman is? A: No, sir. * * * TIEN: And you say you don't know who Jeff Sloman is? A: No, sir. 11 EFTA00799616

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 13 of 176 TIEN: Does it refresh your recollection that he's the number two prosecutor at the U.S. Attorney's Office? A: No. TIEN: That he's Marie Villafana's boss? A: No. * * * TIEN: Did you meet with an agent named Nesbitt Kuyrkendall, a woman? A: I don't know. TIEN: Did Ms. Kuyrkendall speak to you about getting reimbursed from Mr. Epstein? A: I've never had a discussion with anyone about getting reimbursed from Mr. Epstein. * * * TIEN: And we've learned that many of the girls, some of whom are as old as 23, were told by the government that they would get money at the end of the criminal prosecution. Does that sound familiar to you? A: No, sir. While I knew that none of the Special Agents or I had ever discussed lawsuits or even restitution with any victim during any of their interviews and that First Assistant U.S. Attorney Sloman had never met any of the victims, this was exactly the type of cross-examination that I anticipated Epstein's attorneys would try at a trial. The Office and I concluded that opening up the possibility for such impeachment would be detrimental to the prosecution of Epstein if a negotiated resolution failed and Epstein were thereafter to be criminally charged. 22. As noted above, the negotiations were difficult and at times I urged the Office to break off negotiations when I felt Epstein's attorneys were proceeding in bad faith. Despite my reservations, I attempted to conduct the negotiations professionally and cordially. Petitioners in this case have attempted to construe some of my communications to suggest that I was overly friendly with Epstein's counsel to the detriment of the victims or that I was taking steps to undercut 12 EFTA00799617

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 14 of 176 the victims' ability to be present at any change of plea. These allegations are erroneous. I was simply being professional and cordial with opposing counsel. 23. For example, I am chided for an email regarding researching misdemeanor charges (see DE361 at 20), but, as noted above, I was instructed to construct a plea to federal or state offenses that resulted in a sentence of two years (later reduced to 18 months). This required me to find a relevant charge with the agreed-upon statutory maximum and then determine whether the facts developed in the investigation fit that charge. I was unable to find a relevant federal charge that had a statutory maximum of two years, and that required me to research the possibility of stacking two federal misdemeanor charges. 24. The Petitioners also suggest that I attempted to "contrive to establish jurisdiction away from the location where the crimes actually occurred—and away from where the victims actually lived—so as to avoid the public finding out about anything" (DE361 at ¶ 24). This also is false. By the time of that email, there already was intense press coverage of the case, including efforts to publicly identify victims. As noted above and in the Declaration of Special Agent Kuyrkendall, and even in the letters from Jane Doe 2's counsel (Exs. 2 and 5), the victims who had been interviewed in the federal investigation were most concerned about keeping their identities secret. The possibility of press coverage was a strong deterrent to their participation in the investigation and possible prosecution. My reason for recommending filing charges in Miami was to protect the privacy interests of the victims in the case by allowing them the opportunity to attend court proceedings — by definition, proceedings open to the public — with a reduced chance that their identities would be compromised. The FBI and the U.S. Attorney's Office regularly transport victims from their homes to court proceedings, and the same would have occurred if 13 EFTA00799618

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 15 of 176 federal charges against Epstein had been filed in Miami. Similarly, with regard to the selection of the attorney representative for the victims, I recommended two Miami attorneys whom I knew to have reputations for being tenacious, skillful, and committed to protecting their clients rather than burnishing their reputations in the press Although I understood that any civil suits that were filed would be publicly available, in light of the stated desire of most victims to remain anonymous, I did not believe that an attorney representative who actively sought out press coverage would be best suited to represent the victims in this case and protect their privacy interests. 25. Petitioners' suggestion that it was the Office, rather than the victims, who desired confidentiality also is misplaced. Even now, more than a dozen years after the investigation began, the Petitioners are proceeding by pseudonym to protect their privacy, and the Office has asserted the privacy rights of the other identified victims, as has counsel for other victims (e.g., DE 335). All of the victims who filed civil claims against Epstein did so by pseudonym, and some victims did not even pursue civil claims for fear of being publicly identified. A suggestion that, ten to twelve years ago, when many were still teenagers, the victims were willing to step forward in a public forum and expose themselves to public scrutiny — much of which was unfairly critical of them — is unfounded and untrue. 26. In June 2009, while Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 and many other victims were pursuing their civil suits against Epstein and while the instant case was pending, the Court asked me to address an issue related to the NPA and the civil suits. With counsel for Petitioners present, I informed the Court that: the non-prosecution agreement[] sought to do one thing, which was to place the victims in the same position they would have been if Mr. Epstein had been convicted of the federal offenses for which he was investigated. And that if he had 14 EFTA00799619

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 16 of 176 been federally prosecuted and convicted, the victims would have been entitled to restitution, regardless of how long ago the crimes were committed, regardless of how old they were at the time, and hold old they are today, or at the time of the conviction. And it also would have made them eligible for damages under [18 U.S.C. §] 2255. And so our idea was, our hope was that we could set up a system that would allow these victims to get that restitution without having to go through what civil litigation will expose them to. You have a number of girls who were very hesitant about even speaking to authorities about this because of the trauma that they have suffered and about the embarrassment that they were afraid would be brought upon themselves and upon their families. So we do through the non- prosecution agreement tried [sic] to protect their rights while also protecting their privacy. (Ex. 10 at 31-32 (emphasis added)). None of the victims' attorneys who were present, including Petitioners' counsel, disputed my statement, and that statement remains true today. The investigative team, the FBI's victim-witness coordinator, and I all proceeded with a "victims fast" approach, and we all used our best efforts to protect the victims and accord them their rights. Petitioners allege that I did not give their now-professed desires to have Epstein prosecuted sufficient weight, but they never communicated those desires to me or the FBI agents and my role was to evaluate the entire situation, consider the input received from all of the victims, and allow the Office to exercise its prosecutorial discretion accordingly. 27. Petitioners' motion also suggests that some of the terms of the NPA or my actions were improper (see DE36I at 26-27). First, plea negotiations — like settlement negotiations (whether between the parties in the instant case or between Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 2, and Epstein) — are normally kept confidential. Rule 11(cX1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure prohibits judicial involvement in plea negotiations, and the Eleventh Circuit has ruled that there is a "bright line rule" that courts should not offer any comments on plea negotiations. See, e.g., United States v. Johnson, 89 F.3d 778, 783 (11th Cir. 1996); United States v. Tobin, 676 F.3d 15 EFTA00799620

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 17 of 176 1264, 1307 (11th Cir. 2012). Likewise, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) requires confidentiality for persons subject to a grand jury investigation. My recommendations to opposing counsel to limit any plea agreement to its essential terms, rather than disclosing the reasons behind those terms, and to exclude the names of persons who would not be parties to the agreement, was in keeping with those general policies. Finally, when at an impasse in negotiations, a change of venue can be beneficial, such as when settlement conferences are held in a judge's chambers or a mediator's office rather than in the office of one of the parties. My suggestion to meet Epstein's counsel "off campus" was in no way improper; it was simply an effort to facilitate a resolution through a meeting at a neutral location, but that meeting never even occurred. On the other hand, during the course of the investigation, I routinely traveled to meet with victims at their homes, their jobs, and at coffee shops. 28. With regard to paragraph 29 of DE361, copies of emails sent to and from my personal email address were produced in discovery. Pursuant to my agreement with Mr. Edwards (counsel for Petitioners), personal email addresses were redacted. Some of those emails are included in the exhibits attached to Petitioners' motion. (See, e.g., DE361-15.) 29. In the end, the Office and I agreed that no federal misdemeanor charges adequately addressed the facts of the case, and the Office decided that, instead, it would forego federal prosecution if Epstein pled guilty to an applicable state offense that would require sex offender registration and an 18-month jail term, and if Epstein also agreed to allow the identified victims to obtain an uncontested recovery of damages in lieu of the restitution that would have been available under federal law. 16 EFTA00799621

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 18 of 176 30. Also, with regard to the confidentiality of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, the statements contained in paragraph 31 of DE361 are accurate. As courts have acknowledged, NPAs are not made part of a public court file but are maintained by a prosecutor's office. The Privacy Act, Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e), and other statutes and rules keep private files related to subjects of investigations. There are some laws, including FOIA, that limit the confidentiality of those files, but, generally speaking, there is no public right of access to the Office's files. Thus, the assurance that I would not distribute — essentially, "leak" — the NPA was simply an assurance that I intended to abide by Office and Department policy and the law. The NPA made clear that the Office would disclose the NPA in response to appropriate FOIA requests and compulsory process, but would provide Epstein with notice before making such disclosure. (DE361, Ex. 62 at 5.) In part, this notice would ensure that no unlawful disclosure would be made mistakenly and subject the Office to civil liability. Nothing in the NPA prohibited disclosing its terms to the victims; the confidentiality provision covered only the document itself. 31. Petitioners' motion contains a number of other criticisms of the terms of the NPA, but despite my letters to them giving them my telephone number and encouraging them to contact me, neither Jane Doe 1 nor Jane Doe 2 ever contacted me or Special Agent Kuyrkendall prior to the signing of the NPA to ask about the investigation or to encourage prosecution. Jane Doe 2 specifically told me that she did not want Epstein prosecuted. Other victims had told me their fears of having their involvement with Esptein revealed and the negative impact it would have on their relationships with family members, boyfriends, and others. 32. Once the NPA was signed on September 24, 2007, I asked the agents to meet with the victims to provide them with information regarding the terms of the agreement and the 17 EFTA00799622

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 19 of 176 conclusion of the federal investigation. I also anticipated that they would be able to inform the victims of the date of the state court change of plea, but that date had not yet been set by state authorities at the time the first victims were notified. 33. Special Agents Kuyrkendall and Richards met with three victims, including Jane Doe 1, soon after the NPA was signed. It had been anticipated that they would meet with all the victims. However, almost immediately after the NPA was signed, Epstein, through his counsel, began to delay and inhibit the performance of his obligations under the NPA. First, he challenged the method for selecting the attorney-representative provided by the NPA for victims who wished to use that attorney's services in seeking damages from Epstein. Among other efforts, Epstein also sought to challenge the list of victims identified during the course of the investigation and, as mentioned above, specifically attacked the inclusion of Jane Doe 2 as a victim because of her exculpatory statements. While Petitioners here suggest that I was too lenient in my handling of the negotiations with Epstein's counsel, after the NPA was signed, Epstein's counsel raised challenges that I had been too aggressive. 34. These and other attacks and efforts to avoid the NPA's terms led the FBI investigative team, the Office, and me to conclude that prosecution and trial remained a possibility and we should prepare as such. This meant that the victim notifications had to cease because: (1) we no longer knew whether Epstein would perform under the NPA and, hence, we did not know whether providing information about the NPA would be accurate; and (2) we believed that Epstein, through his counsel, would attempt to use victim notifications concerning the NPA to suggest that the victims had been encouraged by the FBI or the Office to overstate their victimization for monetary compensation. The FBI and the Office decided, therefore, to do no further notifications 18 EFTA00799623

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 20 of 176 regarding the NPA at that time. Our concerns were prescient as shown by the deposition quoted in paragraph 21 above. This deposition occurred in February 2008 during the period that Epstein was complaining to various levels of the Justice Department about the investigation and the NPA. 35. Accordingly, the investigation continued while Epstein raised numerous erroneous allegations against me, the investigative team, other Office personnel, and the victims, seeking release from the Office and the Department of Justice of the obligations he had undertaken in the NPA. (See Exs. D, G, K, L, O.) While those "appeals" proceeded to the U.S. Attorney, the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section in Washington, D.C., the Assistant Attorney General, and the Deputy Attorney General, the investigative team and I continued interviewing and identifying victims, issuing subpoenas, and collecting evidence. The investigation continued up until the day that Epstein entered his state court guilty plea. 36. One of the people who was re-interviewed after the NPA was signed was Jane Doe 1, who was re-interviewed on January 31, 2008. I was present for that interview. Since I was aware that Epstein might proceed to trial, as with other victims whom I interviewed, I asked Jane Doe 1 whether she would be willing to testify if there were a trial. At that time, Jane Doe 1 stated that she hoped Epstein would be prosecuted and that she was willing to testify. The FBI's letters of January 10, 2008, informing Jane Doc 1 and Jane Doe 2 that the case was still under investigation and that it could be a lengthy process (Ex. J) were accurate. Jane Doe l's re- interview was part of that continued investigation, so no one was deceived. The process was not lengthier only because Epstein ultimately entered his state court guilty pleas as contemplated by the NPA. 19 EFTA00799624

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 21 of 176 37. In mid-June 2008, Attorney Edwards contacted your Affiant to inform me that he represented Jane Doe 1 and another identified victim (not Jane Doe 2). Attorney Edwards asked to meet to provide me with information regarding Epstein. On June 19, 2008, Attorney Edwards sent me an email stating that he had "information and concerns that I would like to share" and that he wanted to meet with me to "discuss [his] plans." DE362-30. As noted in the email, he had one "client" at the time, who has been referred to in this suit as Jane Doe I, and he did not state that Jane Doe 1 wished to meet with me. (Id.) I invited Attorney Edwards to send to me any information that he wanted me to consider. At the time of my conversation with Attorney Edwards, I was still preparing to present charges against Epstein if Epstein succeeded in having the NPA set aside or if he failed to perform the terms of the NPA. I did not disclose the existence of the NPA to Edwards because I did not know whether the NPA remained viable at that time or whether Epstein would enter the state court guilty pleas that would trigger the NPA. I was aware that a final decision on Epstein's challenges to the NPA and the federal investigation was expected shortly, so I impressed upon Attorney Edwards that time was of the essence. Attorney Edwards sent nothing at that time, nor did he ever inform me that Jane Doe 1 and/or Jane Doe 2 wanted to confer with me before any resolution was reached. If anything had been provided by Edwards, Jane Doe 1, or Jane Doe 2, I would have reviewed it and shared it with my superiors. I also advised Attorney Edwards that he should consider contacting the State Attorney's Office. I was informed, however, that no contact with that office was made. At that time, attorney Edwards had also alluded to Jane Doe 2, so I advised him that, to my knowledge, Jane Doe 2 was still represented by Attorney James Eisenberg. He did not dispute or correct my understanding. 20 EFTA00799625

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 22 of 176 38. On Friday, June 27, 2008, at approximate 4:15 p.m., I received a copy of Epstein's proposed state plea agreement and learned that Epstein's state court change of plea was scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Monday, June 30, 2008. The Palm Beach Police Department and I attempted to notify the victims about that hearing in the short time available to us. I specifically called attorney Edwards to provide notice to his clients regarding the hearing. I believe that it was during this conversation that Attorney Edwards notified me that he represented Jane Doe 2. I urged attorney Edwards to have his clients attend the hearing so that they could address the Court, if they wished, and I stressed the importance of the hearing. I never told Attorney Edwards that the state charges involved "other victims," and neither the state court charging instrument nor the factual proffer limited the procurement of prostitution charge to a specific victim. In fact, as mentioned in 1 37, supra, I had encouraged Attorney Edwards to contact the State Attorney's Office to discuss his client and the Epstein investigation with the state prosecutor. Attorney Edwards informed me that he could not attend the hearing but that someone would be present at the hearing. The case agents and I attended the hearing as members of the general public, and did not publicly announce our presence since we were there only as observers. Neither attorney Edwards nor any of his clients were present, and no one identified themselves to me, the FBI agents, or the state court as being present on behalf of the petitioners. /// /// /// 21 EFTA00799626

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 23 of 176 39. On July 3, 2008, attorney Edwards contacted me to discuss how the Epstein matter had been resolved and to raise concerns regarding that resolution. I shared the concerns that attorney Edwards raised with my superiors at the U.S. Attorney's Office. 40. 1 declare under penalty of perjury, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Executed this day of June, 2017. Marie Villafafia, Esq. 22 EFTA00799627

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 24 of 176 EXHIBITS TO 6/2/2017 VILLAFARA DECLARATION Exhibit Number Description 1 January 24, 2007 letter from A. Marie Villafafia to James Eisenberg with attachment (redacted) 2 February 1, 2007 letter from James Eisenberg to A. Marie ViBala& (redacted) 3 February 5, 2007 fax from A. Marie Villafafia to James Eisenberg with attachments (redacted) 4 February 6, 2007 Authorization for Reimbursement of Unusual Expenses (redacted) 5 February 12, 2007 letter from James Eisenberg to A. Marie Villafaiia (redacted) 6 April 16, 2007 Order from Judge Middlebrooks (redacted) 7 December 13, 2007 letter from A. Marie Villafafia to Jay Lefkowitz (redacted) 8 January 26, 2015 Declaration of Timothy R. Slater, Section Chief, Federal Bureau of Investigation (redacted) 9 February 20, 2008 Deposition Transcript, State of Florida v. Jeffley Epstein (redacted) 10 June 12, 2009 Hearing Transcript, Jane Doe, et aL v. Jeffrey Epstein, S.D. Fla. Case No. 08-80119-CIV-Marra EFTA00799628

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 25 of 176 Exhibit 1 EFTA00799629

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 26 of 176 U.S. Department of Justice United Slates Attorney Southern District of FlOrida DELIVERY BY BAND James L. Bamberg, Esq. 250 S Australian Ave, Ste104 West Palm Beach, FL 33.401-5007 Dear Jim; 500 South Attain/too Ave, &Ito 400 act Pa& :Beach, FL 334W (50)1120-871 Amniotic 0008204777 January 24, 2007 Re; Federal _Subpoena have enclosed a new subpoena forTEM MS M I mentioned earlier, Ms. Millis nova target of this investigation and the United States ec s her testimonysolely ea avictim/wituess, Daring our last conyemationregarrling Ms. NiIM you indicated that she was unwilling to speak with us pursuant to a Kqtigar letter and that she also was unwilling to speak with the Sand intends to invoke the Fifth Amendment if questioned. Please maw with her to confirm whether this remains her position. 'filial pleas, advise in writing. Evenif Ms. Millis inclined to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights, she must still appear pursuant to the subpoena so that I may ask her questions that would not require the invocation of the FifthAmendment. If she still invokes, I intend to move to compel her answers. If you oryour client is unainulahle on February 6; 2007, plea.se lame know of another Tuesday when you are available. I also am concerned about a potential tonflibt 'gluten* in yourrepresentationotivIs; Ma In ease of future litigation regarding this lane, please provide me with information regarding who is paying (directly br indirectly) for yourservices on beludfof Ma; la the scope of your representatisand whether yop am taking .dlrection on this matter front anyone abort= Ms. MEIN If any fbtmal or infornuil joint defense agreements exist, Whether in writing or otherviises please provides copy of such agreements. lithe agreement is pUrebboral, please provide a written summary of its terms: GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT 4 1. Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P4303736 EFTA00799630

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 27 of 176 JAWS EISENBERG, ESQ. JANUARY 24, 2007 PAus 2 I look forward to your response. By: Sincerely, IL Alexander Acosta Una States Attorney A. Marie Villafafla Assistant United States Attorney Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-003737 EFTA00799631

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 28 of 176 United States District Court AVM/ERN MISTNOT OF FLORIDA Ta nal SUBPOENA TO TESTIFY SUBPOENA FOR: Ell PERSON g DOCUMENTS OR OBJECT[S] YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to appear and testify heronsthe Grand IirryortheUnitestStates District Court st the place, date and time SpedifiedbeloW. N,ACB: United Stales District Courthouse 701 Clematis Street West Pahn Desch, Florida $3401 Min DATE AND TIME: February 6, P07 1:001ase, YOU ARE ALSO COMMANDED tit king with you the rollowing d000ment(e) or objeot(s): *Muse coordinate your compliance with this subpoena and confirm the date and time, and location of your appearance With Special Agent NesbittKuyrkendall, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Telephone: (S61)-822-5946. This subpoena shall main in effect until you are granted leave to depart by the court or by an officer acting on behalf of the court Matt DEPTJTY CLERK DATE: January 23, 2007 This subpoena is *pod upon eppligetton of the led States.of Attica Name; Address and Thong Thirnber of Assistant U.S. Attorney Anulviturie C, Vilisfens AssittrtUS• Mom* 500 So. Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Nintfieach, FL 3moi-05 'TO MI) 820-871f x3047 _ Fax: (56I) 802-1787 • *Vim applliobla, via •nOnet mMs,Whisawe Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA FORKORSI27 13-0804,88 EFTA00799632

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 29 of 176 Exhibit 2 EFTA00799633

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 30 of 176 EISENBERG & FOUTS, P.A. Attorneys At Law JAMES L. EISENBERG *sada Bor Board Cedilla) Criminal Trial layer. Natlonl BOAtli CITTrial Adtoamy Certified Colinlual rrhl Advatott KM ALOE sours OnoClatunkaCantrat Suite704,250 Australian Avenue Saufli,Wizt Pala Beach, FL334QI 561/659-200917=561/6513 180 February 1, 2007 A. Marie Villefana, Asst. U.S. Attorney 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Re; Grand hay Subpoena fbr Dear Marie, I received your hitter dated January 24, 2007.with regard to ANN= I must admit 1 forced myself to wait several'days to respond in order to "cool off" and not say anything I would regret later. Now that time has passed, allow me to respond appropriately. 1. If you want to force Ms. a single mother, to come to the to personally involo her Fifth Amendment nghts, she will be there. That does remain her position. My only request is that you a babysitter service for her' ebild. I will be there, but 1 am not paid to babysit and.Ms. should not have ju ay someone. It is this type of attitude, that your office refuses to acceptthe fact that it is Ms. MMs decision not to cooperate withthe government that upsets her. Your office fails to recogaite that merely coming to courtis a problem for a single mother like Ms, d, under these circumstances, appears to be a waste of time at best and, in her mind, person assment. 2. Rest assurcdthatthere Is no conflict °finis:west in rayrepresentation of Ms. M. la this. case I have alivays been asked and-eh/Myst:11 exercise independentjydgment to follow my client's independent will. The remainder of your questions as to this matter are really none of the. Goveniment's business. 3. 1 will share with you that one of the reasons for our firm position that Ms. Nvvill invoke her Fifth Amendment right and choose not tovoluntadly cooperate with the Government is our concern that the Government is not exercising independent judgment in this case, The history of this case bps been in the newspapers. The case is being prosecuted in State court,. Despitethe state court prosecution, the Town of Palm Beach Police Chief went on what can only be GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-003732 EFTA00799634

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 31 of 176 A. Marie Villa.fata, Asst. U.S. Attorney February 1, 2007 Page Two described as a public rampagein the newspaper when the case was not prosecuted to his.liking that reminded me of a small child having apublio temper tantrum. In ro.Y thirty years of experience, I have never seen a law enforcement Officer like this publicly Make what appeared to be a political case In the newspaper for a prosecution and publicly criticize anyone who got in his way, including the eleCtedStateAttorney„ This resulted in, a fedond investigation one topic no oneremembers the Federal:Government ever beinginterested in prosecuting before. Although I am certain that you PerahnallY have not badyourdecision-mak:Mg process compromised, the appearance that your office is being influenced by the Town of Palm Beach Police Chiefs agenda is. very real. Under these• cirountstancesel don't see how any lawyer could advise ay client to voluntarily cooperate. Of special coneernis -Rattle Town ofFahn Beach Police have promoted prosecuting at leastone of the girls who allegedly gaire massages. One. final thought. My client and my fear that Ms. balcould be prosecuted is enhanced by the demand for the personal appearance made in your letter. Your initial Kastiger letterifall far shrift of granting the functional equivalent bfD0J imniutiity. Several months ago I was given the distinct impression through our conversations that you were going to obtain DOJ Immunity for Ms. IA Now the government is cbanging count for no apparent reason. This leads to speculation that the only reason for the turnabout is that prosecution in either state or federal cotes id being considered by someone, directed atyoupersonally. I want to repeat that youhitve always treated us with office should advise the TovaaPolice Chief to act in a similar fashion. Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA. P-003733 EFTA00799635

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 32 of 176 Exhibit 3 EFTA00799636

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 33 of 176 U.S. Departntent of tunic° United States Attorney SoatheraDistriet of Florida q. Marie Villaidlia 500 South Australian Ave, Suite 400' 11,-..• n..... t, 21401 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET TO: JIM EISENBERG, ESO, DATE: FAX NO. 561 659-2380 # OF PAGES: FEDER NO. RE: FebtuarV .5, 2007 FROM: A MARIE V/LLAF ASSISTANT V. B. ATTORNEY last th 17r4-- Thee- (5cug 1/Le commE .19(At izoitt a ji)tet. d.thk OV-howe_ afrua burs JO- Todik (40- 6eppreztau 44 GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT S' 3 • Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-003745 EFTA00799637

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 34 of 176 11.$,Department of Justice United StarCs. Attorney Southern District ofFlorida shOWouth AmamiIlan Ave, Suite 400 February 5, 2007 nnuv0ix BY }WO 148/1M MEI c/o lames I,. RiSenberg, Sgq, 250 S Australian Aye, Ste704 West Palm Beach, FIM401-5007 Re: Dear Ms, lv This letter confirms thvunderstanding between yourself and the United States Attorney's Office /brute Southern District•of Florida. You have represented that you till truthfully answer questions of the federal government in its investigation of the procurement of prostitutes, amongst others. You Will supply complete and netball 1 OIM -0 • 0 the attorneys and law eadbrcement °effects of the federal government and to any Molt may conduct an investigation, as well as in any other proceeding related to or growing out of this investigation. The obligation of borthitil disclosure includes your obligation to provide the attorneys and law enforcement Officers of the federalgovernment with any demo:bents, records or other tangible evidence within your.custody or Control relating in the matters about ithich you are questioned. IL'Ouwill neither attempt to protect Any person or entity through /hiss information pr omission, nor falsely iniplicate any person or entity. No statements provided by you on this date in this matter pursuant to this agreement will be offered into evidence in snyetirninal case against you, exceptduring aprosecntion forperj toy and/or iivinga false statement. &Weyer, ifit determined that you have tnaboriallyviolated any provision • of tine agteomeut, all statements made by you shall be admissible in evidence against you in auy. proceeding, The federal government remains 'free to use information derived from the testimony dire.ctly or indirectly for the purpose of obtaining leads to other Oldie's*, Wbicl 'may need against you. You expressly Waive any right to aim that. mob evidence should not be introdueed because it was obtained as a result of the grand jury tosfilminy. Furthermore, the federal govenuilent may use statements made in the grand jury testimony and all evidence derived directly or indirectly therefrom for the purpose of cross-exataination, ifyOu testify daily trial or if.You Case No. 0g-80736-CV-MARRA P-003739 EFTA00799638

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 35 of 176 1Y18.11.4111 FBBIWARY 5,2007 ?Akin 2 suborn testimony that contradicts your prior Statements and testiniony! No additional promises, agreements and conditions havebeen entexedisto otherthanthose set forth in this letter and none Will be entered into unless in writing and signed by all patties. Since*, Aletitnnsier Acosta United States Attorney A. Mario Villareal Assistant United States:Aitomey T have read this agreement and discussed it with•ply attorney, and T hereby acknowledge that it fhlly sets -font my agreement with the office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida. I state that there have been no additional promises, agreements pt representations-made to me by any officiala ofthe United States in connection with this matter. Dated: February , 2007 'West Palm Beach, Florida witnessed by: lames la limber Attorney feel= Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-003740 EFTA00799639

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 36 of 176 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney SoutheitrDistrictof Florida .500 South Australian Ave45)ibe-400. ;I'm; fiabliBiach. Pt j3401 February 5, 2007 DELIVERY rir HAND Ames L. Eisenberg, Esq. 250 t Australian Ave, Stc 704 West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5007 Rer Dear Mr. Eisenberg: I am writing to• clarify the ground rules for the interview with your pliant, TM Ivaryour olienr), to occur February , 2007. As I mentioned earlier, MS. lvillis not a target 0t sUbject of this investigation, but instead is being interviewed solely is a victim/Witness, Homier, to address your concern aboµt criminal exposure, if your (silent complies with rieryprOviSion of this agreement, then the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (".this (gibe s) will treat all statements made by your clientduring the interview as statements made pursuant to Rule 11(i) of the Federal Rules of Criminal itooechnie. This is not a grant of immunity, Which can be given only with approval of the Iustice Department, but protect? your client from having the statements made by her during the interview ftpm being used against her directly. To guard against anymisunderstandings onnearning the interview of your O0114 this letter sets feath the terms of this agreement. . Your client agrees to be fully interviewed, that is, to provide information Correcting your client's knowledge of, and participation in criminal aetivity, including but not limited . to the procurement of prostitutes. Theprotection$ this letter applies to an interview that will be conchieted by this Office, Special Agents ofthelleclerall3ureau ofinvegtigafton, and any other federal law enforcement agency this Office may require. Under this agreement, no. information disclosed by your client during The interview will be offered in evidence against her in any criminal or thin proceeding, proVided that your client complies with.this sgrednent and that the information your client finishes is truthfldrcomplete, and accurate: If, however, y.our 'Aleut gives materially false, incomplete, or misleading information; Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-003741 EFTA00799640

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 37 of 176 James 04.,. SENBIllte, ESQ. EIMIWARY 2, 2007 PAGE 2. then this Office may use such information in any matter or proceeding and your Client is subject tO prosecution for perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false Statements government agencies. Any such Prosecution maybe based UpOrrinfoimatiOn provided by your client during the course of the interview, and such Mfortnation, belittling your client's • statements, will be admissible against your client it any grand jury or other proceeding. • ThegoVetement also may use statements made by your Client in the interview and all evidence derived directly or hi:tiredly therefrom for the purpose of' iMpetiohment or cross-ccamination if she testifies at any trial-or hearing,' and/or-in any rebuttal case-against your' client in a criminal trial in whic4h she is a defendant. or a witness, These provisions are necessary to ensure that your client does not make or offer any false representation at statement in an?' proeCoding. or to a government agency or ooxmnit perjury during any testintony, Yourclient further agrees that attorneys for the United States may be present at the interview, and agrees not to seek.disqualiflcation of any such government attorney from any proteeding or trial her-Ruse of their participation at the interview. • The entire agreement between the 'nited States and your client is set forth in this letter. No additional promises, agreements, or conditions have been entered into and none will be entered into unleis in writing and signed by all parties. If the fbmgoing accurately reflects the understanding and agreement between this Offlceandyour client, it is requested that you and your nitwit exectite this letter as provided below, Sincerely, it Alexander Acosta 'United States AttOniey BY: A. Marie ViilafhPia • . Assistant United States Attorney I taivereceived this letter from my.attorney, Iranes.L. liisertberg, Iisquire, have read it end discussed it with thy attorney, and I hereby acknowledge that it fidly sets forth my understanding and agteendant with the Office oftheThitedStates Attorney forte Southern Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-003742 EFTA00799641

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 38 of 176 ,Lithiss L. BISENBERO ESq. RI ; P 2, PAGES' District of Florida, I state that there have been no additional promises or representations made to me by any official of the United States Govermtent or by my attorney in connection with this matter, Dated: Witnessed by: Mims t", Eisenberg, Batlike Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-003743 EFTA00799642

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 39 of 176 Exhibit 4 EFTA00799643

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 40 of 176 U.S. Department of Justice Authorization for Reimbursement of Unueual Expenses of Fact Wit:desires Request for Unusual Expense(o) of Fact Witness (For United States Attorney's Office Use Only) Control# . a on o our West- Palm 2. Court boded Nurfiber 3. Requesting AUSA A. M04 Vitarta, 5. °intact Person 6. Contact Person Ntimber 90 zoq - /041- "7 7. Witness Name& , agm a one • t. tyl,c sfh #, SSN Ma . & Vendor Name & Address, Phone it, TIN/S$N 9. Paytnent to hepatic' to: a M- 10. Recsiptfinvolce Is: 11. Type of Unusual Expense: Medically Necessary Item (Attached SuppodIng Statement) lapopendeet Care Excess Leda Ing/Per Diem El Travel &Transportation K Pretrial Conference Waiver K other 12. Explanation: Tht. f.A))5" 44 41:LO a- StYiall tomic6Lpteei- had. no &rya ti?i*Ctell fe-e CICA-41 co/AAie kAhfi ted- CELLS x'10" Gulta C. Ca. 18.Start Date of -Seivide imo/DANS) ZIG /0 "7 14. End Date of Service (MO/DA/YR) 2 —/to 107 IS:Amount 16. JustlfiCation: GOVERNMENT I EXHIBIT 17. I hereby certify thatthe expenses and Semites listed on.thls document are.approPriate and are within the Federal laws and regulations. I fully understand that I can be held personally liable or be subject to casetfilnaty action for Inipropedy using government funds or services that exceed delegated authority or that violate Federal laws or regulations, signaium of Requesting AUSA 18. Name & Tale of Approving Official Date 19, Dale (MO/DA/YR) 20. Signature of Approving Official Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA Form P-003744 EFTA00799644

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 41 of 176 Exhibit 5 EFTA00799645

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 42 of 176 EISENBERG & Fotrrs, P.A. Attorneys At Law JAMES L. EISENBERG Pieties Bar Board Certified CrindnaltrIel LIMO. Yettienel BORN OtTrittl Advocacy Coinled Candled TrW Advocate EAI LI ALOE ItsIns Oneacirlalto Centre, Suitt) 704,250Australlan Avenue South+ WestPalm Boath,FL33401 361/654-200Fax1561/6594380 February 12, 2007 A. Marie Villefanp Asst. U.S. Attorney 500 South Australian Avenue, Suite 40.0 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Re:. Dear Marie, for 1 As always, it was a pleasure speaking to you the other day, Pursuant to our telephone conference am writing this letter to proffer iny concerns (erg.= hashould she testify without inununity before.alliMMI„ Therefore, allow meth reiterate that Ms. mitowill refuse to voluntarily cooperate with the federal government, She has a good faith basis for er position wider the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, We, of course, do not live or work in a vacuum. We have read many infiruntriatory remarks the Town of Palm Bewail Police Chief has made to the media about the state court's handling of the Jeffrey. Epstein investigation. The polkachief s remarks frighten both myself and my client. Tam aware that the town police have prepared dc•cuments to charge at least one of Mr. l3pstein's lady friends.in state court. If theyoan push to have one lady ehargedl remain unconvinced that they do not have• the ability or political clout to push to have other ladies such as Ms. ME charged. The Proffered filets that rathe my concerns are being provided via thisprofThr letter. Pursuant to our telephonaconference agreement, this letter and its contents cannot be used against Mr. MIN Ms. Minlis not at all eefitain of dates. She does remember meeting Mr. Bpstoinabout three years ago. She is not certain of her ago, it could have been when she was sixteen, A girlfriend asked her if she wanted a job giving massages. Ms. iviMagreed beetnise she bad knowledge of massages through her mother, who was a. masseuse. MS. Mewerit t0 Mr. Epstein's house via trod. Ms. girlfriend instructed Ms. Ivillthrit, if asked, she had to tell Mr. Epstein that she (M. was eighteen years old. The friend was nineteen years old and Millooked old for her age, so passing for eighttenwas nota problem. At , GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-003730 EFTA00799646

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 43 of 176 the home Ms' Milinet Mr. Epstein and later gave him a massage. The friend had teildMs. to give the message toplests; Mr. Epstein told lvalthal if she were at all uncomfortable being topless, not to do it and It Was not a requirement of employment as a masseuse. Ms. laneyer touehed.Mr. Epstein in a sexual way and Mr. Epstein never touched Ms. Mild all. At one point, Mr. Epstein, did ask Ms. Milherage. Ms. Milinsisted that she was eighteen years old. Ms. mar.ontinued to see Mr. Epstein over time and massages were given in a similar fashion, She was later asked if her friends wanted to work in a similar way and she asked scime girls who did give Mr. Epstein massages. Ma. Ivilliwas never asked to bring girls of any age to Mr. Epstein's home, When She didhave bet friends some over, she instructed all Of them.that askedeibeY insist that they were eighteen years old. She is not certain at all of any of these girls' real ages. In stunmary, otrr concern is that if the govermnent believes that Mr. Epsteincomunitted some federal offense, thetafs.11licould beconsiderecia co-conspirator, We believes no Crimewas committed.. The Fifth Aniendment was not intended to protect the guilty, he/fever, It was enacted to proteot citizens who fear prosecution notwithstanding their innocence, Our fear of `any prosecution, especially j. ' the :MIND police chiefs public retrofits, is clearly in good faith. Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-003731 EFTA00799647

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 44 of 176 Exhibit 6 EFTA00799648

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 45 of 176 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOTJTIIERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA NORTHERN (WEST PALM BEACH) DIVISION IN RE: / SEALED ORDER On Application of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court: 1. That TINMIIIIIhas been called to testify and to provide other information before the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and 2. That in the judgment of the said United States Attorney, 1 MN has refused to testify and provide other information on the basis of her privilege against self-incrimination; and 3. That in the judgment of the said United States Attorney, the testimony and other infonnatiim from' J ME may be necessary to the public interest; and 4. That the aforesaid Application has been made with the approval of the Assistant Attorney General in. charge of the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice or a duly designated Acting Assistant Attorney General, pursuant to the authority vested in hint by Title 18, United States Code, Section 6003, and Title 28, Code of Federal Regulations, Sections 0.175 and 0.132(e). NOW, IHEREFORE, it is orderedpursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 6002, that TOgive testimony and provide other information which she refus • EFTA00799649

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 46 of 176 provide on the basis of herprivilege against self-incrimination, as to all matters aboutwhich she may be interrogated before said United States District Court, as well as any subsequent proceeding or trial. However, no testimony or other information compelled under this Order (orsny information directly or indirectly derived from such testimony or otheiinfomiation) may be used against TM .MIllin any criminal case, except a prosecution for perjury, giving a false statement, or otherwise failing to comply with this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the this Order shall be SEALED in accordance with Fed. Crim. P. 6(e)(6), except that a copy of this Order shall bo provided to counsel for the United States, who may disclose the existence of the Order to the witness, to counsel for the witness, and to law enforcement officers engaged in the investigation Those persons may review the Order, but may not retain a copy of the Order, nor may they disclose the existence of the Order to any others. DONE and ORDERED this day of April, 200 ie t Palm Beach, Florida. cc: A Marie Villafaila, AUSA DONALD M. MIDDLEBROOKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2 ti EFTA00799650

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 47 of 176 Exhibit 7 EFTA00799651

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 48 of 176 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida DELIVERY BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Jay P. Lefkowitz, Esq. Kirkland & Ellis LLP Citigroup Center 153 East 53rd Street New York, New York 10022-4675 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Jay: SOO S. Australian Ave, Ste 400 West Palos Beach, FL 33401 December 13, 2007 I am writing not to respond to your asserted "policy concerns" regarding Mr. Epstein's Non- Prosecution Agreement, which will be addressed by the United States Attorney, but the time has come for me to respond to the ever-increasing attacks on my role in the investigation and negotiations. It is an understatement to say that I am surprised by your allegations regarding my role because I thought that we had worked very well together in resolving this dispute. I also am surprised because I feel that I bent over backwards to keep in mind the effect that the agreement would have on Mr. Epstein and to make sure that you (and he) understood the repercussions of the agreement. For example, I brought to your attention that one potential plea could result in no gain lime for your client; I corrected one of your calculations of the Sentencing Guidelines that would have resulted in Mr. Epstein spending far more time in prison than you projected; I contacted the Bureau of Prisons to see whether Mr. Epstein would be eligible for the prison camp that you desired; and I told you my suspicions about the source of the press "leak" and suggested ways to avoid the press. Importantly, I continued to work with you in a professional manner even after I learned that you had been proceeding in bad faith for several weeks — thinking that I had incorrectly concluded that solicitation of minors to engage in prostitution was a registrable offense and that you would "fool" our Office into letting Mr. Epstein plead to a non-registrable offense. Even now, when it is clear that neither you nor your client ever intended to abide by the terms of the agreement that he signed, I have never alleged misconduct on your part. The rust allegation that you raise is that I "assiduously" hid from you the fact that Bert Ocariz is a friend of my boyfriend and that I have a "longstanding relationship" with Mr. Ocariz. I GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT EFTA00799652

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 49 of 176 JAY P. LEFKOWFTZ, ESQ. DECEMBER 13, 2007 PAGE 2 OF S I informed you that I selected Mr. Ocariz because he was a friend and classmate of two people whom I respected, and that I had never met or spoken with Mr. Ocariz prior to contacting him about this case. All of those facts are true. I still have never met Mr. Ocariz, and, at the time that he and I spoke about this case, he did not know about my relationship with his friend. You suggest that I should have explicitly informed you that one of the referrals came from my "boyfriend" rather than simply a "friend," which is the term I used, but it is not my nature to discuss my personal relationships with opposing counsel. Your attacks on me and on the victims establish why I wanted to find someone whom I could trust with safeguarding the victims' best interests in the face of intense pressure from an unlimited number of highly skilled and well paid attorneys. Mr. Ocariz was that person. One of your letters suggests a business relationship between Mr. Ocariz and my boyfriend. This is patently untrue and neither my boyfriend nor I would have received any financial benefit from Mr. Ocariz's appointment. Furthermore, after Mr. Ocariz learned more about Mr. Epstein's actions (as described below), he expressed a willingness to handle the case pro bono, with no financial benefit even to himself. Furthermore, you were given several other options to choose from, including the Podhurst firm, which was later selected by Judge Davis. You rejected those other options. You also allege that I improperly disclosed information about the case to Mr. Ocariz. I provided Mr. Ocariz with a bare bones summary ofthe agreement's terms related to his appointment to help him decide whether the case was something he and his firm would be willing to undertake. I did not provide Mr. Ocariz with facts related to the investigation because they were confidential and instead recommended that he "Google" Mr. Epstein's name for background information. When Mr. Ocariz asked for additional information to assist his firm in addressing conflicts issues, I forwarded those questions to you, and you raised objections for the first time. I did not share any further information about Mr. Epstein or the case. Since Mr. Ocariz had been told that you concurred in his selection, out of professional courtesy, I informed Mr. Ocariz of the Office's decision to use a Special Master to make the selection and told him that the Office had made contact with Judge Davis. We have had no further contact since then and I have never had contact with Judge Davis. I understand from you that Mr. Ocariz contacted Judge Davis. You criticize his decision to do so, yet you feel that you and your co-counsel were entitled to contact Judge Davis to try to "lobby" him to select someone to your liking, despite the fact that the Non-Prosecution Agreement vested the Office with the exclusive right to select the attorney representative. Another reason for my surprise about your allegations regarding misconduct related to the Section 2255 litigation is your earlier desire to have me perform the role of "facilitator" to convince the victims that the lawyer representative was selected by the Office to represent their interests alone and that the out-of-court settlement of their claims was in their best interests. You now state that doing the same things that you had asked me to do earlier is improper meddling in civil litigation. Much of your letter reiterates the challenges to Detective Recarey's investigation that have EFTA00799653

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 50 of 176 JAY P. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ. DECEMBER 13, 2007 PAGE 3 OF 5 already been submitted to the Office on several occasions and you suggest that I have kept that information from those who reviewed the proposed indictment package. Contrary to your suggestion, those submissions were attached to and incorporated in the proposed indictment package, so your suggestion that I tried to hide something from the reviewers is false. I also take issue with the duplicity of stating that we must accept as true those parts of the Recarey reports and witness statements that you like and we must accept as false those parts that you do not like. You and your co-counsel also impressed upon me from the beginning the need to undertake an independent investigation. It seems inappropriate now to complain because our independent investigation uncovered facts that are unfavorable to your client. You complain that I "forced" your client and the State Attorney's Office to proceed on charges that they do not believe in, yet you do not want our Office to inform the State Attorney's Office of facts that support the additional charge nor do you want any of the victims of that charge to contact Ms. Belohlavek or the Court. Ms. Belohlavek's opinion may change if she knows the full scope of your client's actions. You and I spent several weeks trying to identify and put together a plea to federal charges that your client was willing to accept. Yet your letter now accuses me of "manufacturing" charges of obstruction of justice, making obscene phone calls, and violating child privacy laws. When Mr. Lourie told you that those charges would "embarrass the Office," he meant that the Office was unwilling to bend the facts to satisfy Mr. Epstein's desired prison sentence — a statement with which I agree. I hope that you understand how your accusations that I imposed "ultimatums" and "forced" you and your client to agree to unconscionable contract terms cannot square with the true facts of this case. As explained in letters from Messrs. Acosta and Sloman, the indictment was postponed for more than five months to allow you and Mr. Epstein's other attorneys to make presentations to the Office to convince the Office not to prosecute. Those presentations were unsuccessful. As you mention in your letter, I —a simple line AUSA — handled the primary negotiations for the Office, and conducted those negotiations with you, Ms. Sanchez, Mr. Lewis, and a host of other highly skilled and experienced practitioners. As you put it, your group has a "combined 250 years experience" to my fourteen. The agreement itself was signed by Mr. Epstein, Ms. Sanchez, and Mr. Lcfcourt, whose experience speaks for itself. You and I spent hours negotiating the terms, including when to use "a" versus "the" and other minutiae. When you and I could not reach agreement, you repeatedly went over my head, involving Messrs. Lourie, Menchel, Sloman, and Acosta in the negotiations at various times. In any and all plea negotiations the defendant understands that his options are to plead or to continue with the investigation and proceed to trial. Those were the same options that were proposed to Mr. Epstein, and they are not "persecution or intimidation tactics." Mr. Epstein chose to sign the agreement with the advice of a multitude of extremely noteworthy counsel. You also make much of the fact that the names of the victims were not released to Mr. Epstein prior to signing the Agreement. You never asked for such a .term. During an earlier meeting, where Mr. Black was present, he raised the concern that you now voice. Mr. Black and I did not have a chance to discuss the issue, but 1 had already conceived of a way to resolve that EFTA00799654

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLED Docket 06/02/2017 Page 51 of 176 JAY P. LEFKOvirTZ, ESQ. DECEMBER 13, 2007 PAGE 4 OF 5 issue if it were raised during negotiations. As I stated, it was not, leading me to believe that it was not a matter of concern to the defense. Since the signing of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, the agents and I have vetted the list of victims more than once. In one instance, we decided to remove a name because, although the minor victim was touched inappropriately by Mr. Epstein, we decided that the link to a payment was insufficient to call it "prostitution." I have always remained open to a challenge to the list, so your suggestion that Mr. Epstein was forced to write a blank check is simply unfounded. Your last set of allegations relates to the investigation of the matter. For instance, you claim that some of the victims were informed of their right to collect damages prior to a thorough investigation of their allegations against Mr. Epstein. This also is false. None of the victims was informed of the right to sue under Section 2255 prior to the investigation of the claims. Three victims were notified shortly after the signing of the Non-Prosecution Agreement of the general terms of that Agreement. You raised objections to any victim notification, and no further notifications were done. Throughout this process you have seen that I have prepared this case as though it would proceed to trial. Notifying the witnesses of the possibility of damages claims prior to concluding the matter by plea or trial would only undermine my case. If my reassurances are insufficient, the fact that not a single victim has threatened to sue Mr. Epstein should assure you of the integrity of the investigation.' 'There are numerous other unfounded allegations in your letter about document demands, the money laundering investigation, contacting potential witnesses, speaking with the press, and the like. For the most part, these allegations have been raised and disproven earlier and need not be readdressed. However, with respect to the subpoena served upon the private investigator, contrary to your assertion, and as your co-counsel has already been told, I did consult with the Justice Department prior to issuing the subpoena and I was told that because I was subpoenaing an attorney's office or an office physically located within an attorney's office, and because the business did private investigation work for individuals (rather than working exclusively for Mr. Black), I could issue a grand jury subpoena in the normal course, which is what I did. I also did not "threaten" the State Attorney's Office with a grand jury subpoena, as the correspondence with their grand jury coordinator makes perfectly clear. With regard to your allegation of my filing the Palm Beach Police Department's probable cause affidavit "with the court knowing that the public could access it," I do not know to what you arc referring. All documents related to the grand jury investigation have been filed under seal, and the Palm Beach Police Department's probable cause affidavit has never been filed with the Court. If, in fact, you are referring to the Ex Parte Declaration of Joseph Recarey that was filed in response to the motion to quash the grand jury subpoena, it was filed both under seal and ex parte, so no one should have access to it except the Court and myself. Those documents are still in the Court file only because yaLhave violated one of the tenns of the Agreement by failing to "withdraw [Epstein's] pending motion to intervene and to quash certain grand jury subpoenas." EFTA00799655

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 52 of 176 JAY P. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ. DECEMBER 13, 2007 PAGE 5 OF 5 With respect to Ms. K I contacted her attorney — who was paid for by Mr. Epstein and was directed by counsel for Mr. Epstein to demand immunity — and asked only whether he still represented Ms. MMand if he wanted me to send the victim notification letter to hint. He asked what the letter would say and I told him that the letter would be forthcoming in about a week and that I could not provide him with the terms. With respect to Ms. Ives status as a victim, you again want us to accept as true only facts that are beneficial to your client and to reject as false anything detrimental to him. Ms. NM made a number of statements that are contradicted by documentary evidence and a review of her recorded statement shows her lack of credibility with respect to a number of statements. Based upon all of the evidence collected, Ms. MMis classified as a victim as defined by statute. Of course, that does not mean that Ms. M_considers herself a victim or that she would seek damages from Mr. Epstein. I believe that a number of the identified victims will not seek damages, but that does not negate their legal status as victims. I hope that you now understand that your accusations against myself and the agents are unfounded. In the future, I recommend that you address your accusations to me so that I can correct any misunderstandings before you make false allegations to others in the Department. I hope that we can move forward with a professional resolution of this matter, whether that be by your client's adherence to the contract that he signed, or by virtue of a trial. Sincerely, IL Alexander Acosta United States Attorney By: s/A. Marie Villafaffa A. Marie Villafafia Assistant United States Attorney cc: It Alexander Acosta, U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman, First Assistant U.S. Attorney You also accuse me of "broaden[ing] the scope of the investigation without any foundation for doing so by adding charges of money laundering and violations of a money transmitting business to the investigation." Again, I consulted with the Justice Department's Money Laundering Section about my analysis before expanding that scope. The duty attorney agreed with my analysis. EFTA00799656

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 53 of 176 Exhibit 8 EFTA00799657

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 54 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 304-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2015 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE N I and JANE DOE //2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. DECLARATION OF FBI SPECIAL AGENT TIMOTHY R. SLATER TIMOTHY R. SLATER declares as follows: I. I am a Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), currently assigned as a Section Chief at FBI Headquarters, Washington, D.C. I was appointed a Special Agent in May 1999. Upon graduation from the FBI Academy at Quantico, Virginia, in September 1999, I was assigned to the Detroit Field Office. I was subsequently transferred to the FBI Miami Field Office in May 2006. 2. In 2006. I was assigned to work on an investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, who was accused of sexually abusing many young girls under the age of 18. In the course of our investigation, the FBI identified many potential victims asexual abuse by Epstein. We obtained names by speaking to other victims, who frequently knew of friends who had also been paid money by Epstein to provide sexual services to him. 3. One of the victims identified was—In January — February 2007,1 used various computer indices to try and locate Ms. By using these indices and other means, I found two international phone numbeis which I believed were being used by Ms. GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT Case g EFTA00799658

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 55 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 304-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2015 Page 2 of 3 NIB 4. Sometime during January — February 2007, I called the one of the numbers, in an attempt to speak to Ms. Also in my office was FBI Special Agent Nesbitt E. Kuyrkendall, the lead agent for the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. I was not using a speakerphone when I spoke with Ms. I asked S/A Kuyrkendall to be present because she, as the lead agent, was thoroughly versed in the details of the entire investigation, and I might need her assistance to respond to a question posed by Ms that I was unable to answer. 5. When I dialed the number, a young woman answered the phone. I told her my name, identified myself as a Special Agent with the FBI, and asked if she was She said yes. I used a technique which I employ when speaking to people on the phone, who might question whether I am truly an FBI agent. I provided her with the phone ntunber of the FBI Field Office in Miami, Florida, and told•her she could hang up and verify the number. She could then call me back at the ntunber, and her call would be routed to inc. Ms. said that would not be necessary. 6. I told Ms. about our investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, and the allegations that Epstein had sexually abused many underage young girls. I told her we believed she might be a victim of sexual abuse by Epstein. 7. Ms. answered basic questions, telling me that she did know Jeffrey Epstein. She quickly became uncomfortable, telling me she moved away to distance herself from this situation, and expressing her desire to "let this be in my past." She asked that I not bother her with this again. 8. I thanked Ms. and told her I appreciated her time. I provided my name and encouraged her to call the FBI Miami Field Office, if she had any questions or needed assistance. 2 Govt Exhibit I) Case No. 06-60736-CIV-MARRA EFTA00799659

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 56 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 304-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/30/2015 Page 3 of 3 The entire phone conversation only last several minutes. 9. I did not hear from Ms. again. In mid-March 2007, I reported for my new assignment at FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C. 10. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 26, 2015. TIMOTHY R. SLATER Section Chief Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, D.C. 3 Gov't Exhibit D Case No. 08.80736-0N-MARRA EFTA00799660

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 57 of 176 Exhibit 9 EFTA00799661

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 58 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 27 of 100 nsor & Associates Rernnin,aud TranscrimIce, lac. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. 2006 CF09454AXX STATE OF FLORIDA, -VS- JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. DEPOSITION OF Wednesday, February 20, 2008 2:00 p.m. - 4:30 p.m. Palm Beach County Courthouse 205 North Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Reported By: Judith F. Consor, FPR COPY' Notary Public, State of Florida Consor & Associates Reporting and Transcription Phone - 561.682.0905 Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682,1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 1! GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT I tr W )I 08-80736-C V-MARRA 001233 EFTA00799662

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 59 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/2112008 Page 28 of 100 nsor & Associates Repartins and TraeseripSon, inc. Page 2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 On behalf of the State: 3 LANNA BELOHLAVEK, ESQ. ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY 4 401 North Dixie Highway West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 5 561.355.7100 6 On behalf of the Defendant: MICHAEL R. TEIN, ESQ. 7 KATHRYN A. MEYERS, ESQ. LEWIS TEIN, PL 8 3059 GRAND AVENUE, SUITE 340 COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 9 10 11 12 13 14 On behalf of the Defendant: JACK A. GOLDBERGER, ESQ. ATTERBURY, GOLDBERGER & WEISS 250 AUSTRALIAN AVENUE SOUTH SUITE 1400 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401 561.659.8300 ALSO PRESENT: ON BEHALF OF THE WITNESS: THEODORE J. LEOPOLD, ESQ. 15 KEITH J. BRETT, DIRECTOR OF MULTIMEDIA DIVISION, LEGAL-EZE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 21 /4311 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001234 EFTA00799663

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 60 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 29 of 100 nsor & Associates Repnronp and ItanicrIpcinn, Inc. 1 2 3 WITNESS: INDEX Page 3 PAGE: DIRECT EXAMINATION 4 4 BY MR. TEIN: 5 6 7 NOEXHIBITS MARKED 8 9 CERTIFIED QUESTIONS 10 Page Line 53 22 11 55 1 59 2 12 111 14 112 2 13 14 )5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - - - Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 29 oral 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001235 EFTA00799664

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 61 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 30 of 100 nsor & Associates ROMMIIIS /All 111ClitAilii. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Deposition Court Reporter and Notary Florida at Large, in Thereupon, having been first duly and testified as follows: THE WITNESS: DIRECT taken before Public in and the above cause. Page 4 Judith F. Consor, for the State of was examined sworn or affirmed, I do. EXAMINATION 11 BY MR. TEIN: 12 O. Good afternoon. Please tell me your full 13 nage. 14 A. 15 0. And can you please spell it. 16 A. 7 18 Q. Thank you. 19 May I call you S 20 A. Uh-huh. 21 Q. OM I'm going to ask you a few 22 questions, several questions today. If at any time you 23 want to take a break, you just let me know. Okay? 24 A. Okay. 25 Q. If you at any time don't understand one of Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 30 e1316 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001236 EFTA00799665

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 62 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 31 of 100 nsor & Associates Runonias and Truascririm. lac Page 5 1 my questions, will you just please let me know? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. And if at any time you're not feeling well 4 or something like that, you'll tell us, right? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Do you feel okay today? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Not taking any alcohol or drugs or anything 9 like that, right? 10 A. No. 11 Q. So you feel ready to have your deposition 12 taken? 13 A. Yes. 14 O. what is your address? 15 A. I'm currently living at my aunt's house and 16 I don't know it off the top of my head. 17 Q. Where is it? 18 A. In Jupiter. 19 Q. Who is your aunt? 20 A. 21 Q. Who else is living there? 22 A. MEM my uncle. 23 24 25 Q. A. No. Q. Anyone else living there? The contempt motion that your mother filed Ph. 561.682.0995 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 it Mils 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001237 EFTA00799666

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 63 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 32 of 100 nsor & Associates Reporting And TrAnscri pan:Inc. Page 6 1 against your father regarding your fifty million-dollar 2 lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein says that you live with 3 your aunt and uncle and have been living there; is that 4 correct? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. How long have you been living with your 7 aunt and uncle? 8 A. Since my father kicked me out. 9 Q. That was Thanksgiving of this past year? 10 A. Yes, sir. 11 Q. Okay. Didn't your firefighter boyfriend 12 get an apartment for the two of you? 13 A. No, sir. He has an apartment, but by 14 himself. 15 O. Did he get an apartment for the two of you 16 to live in? 17 A. No, sir. 18 Q. Are you planning to move in with him? 19 A. Maybe one day in the future. 20 Q. Do you have a plan to move in with him 21 presently? 22 A. No. 23 0. Have you been to the apartment that you and L4 have discussed moving in together? 25 A. I have been to the apartment. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682,1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 32 of 314 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001238 EFTA00799667

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 64 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 EnteredonFLSODocket07/21/2008 Page 33 of 100 nsor & Associates Ha parting and Tun scri pa i . Inc Page 7 1 Q. Where is that? 2 A. Palm Beach Lakes. 3 Q. Have you spent the night over there? 4 A. No, sir. 5 Q. Do you know the address there? 6 A. I do not. 7 Q. Isn't your sister planning on living 8 with you and IIII? 9 A. No. 10 Q. you know that this court case is a 11 criminal prosecution, correct? 12 A. Correct. 13 Q. And you know that it's a criminal 14 prosecution against a man who has no criminal background. 15 Do you know that? 16 A. I do now. 17 Q. You agree that court is a very serious 18 matter? 19 A. Yes. 20 O. And you're here with your Lawyer 21 Mr. Leopold, right? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And you know that Mr. Leopold recently 24 filed a lawsuit in federal court against Jeffrey Epstein, 25 seeking fifty million dollars. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 3304315 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001239 EFTA00799668

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 65 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM 34 O'311 ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07121/2008 Page 34 of 100 nsor & Associates Rannrtinp and l'ransctilxlan, lac. Page 8 1 MR. LEOPOLD: Let me just object. 2 let me instruct you. Anything that 3 you have learned through conversations between you 4 and me are protected. So if you know any of that 5 information outside of those discussions, you may 6 answer. But if the only way you know it is 7 through our discussions, do not answer that 8 question. 9 BY MR. TEIN: 10 O. you know that Mr. Leopold recently 11 filed a lawsuit in federal court on your behalf against 12 Jeffrey Epstein seeking fifty million dollars? 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. 14 If you know the answer to that outside of 15 our discussions, you may answer. If it is the 16 only way that you know the answer is through our 17 discussions, do not answer that question. 18 THE WITNESS: Okay. 19 MR. LEOPOLD: Attorney/client privilege. 20 BY MR. TEIN: 21 O. You can answer the question unless 22 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. 23 MR. TEIN: Let me finish. 74 MR. LEOPOLD: Excuse me. We're -- 25 MR. TEIN: No. Let me finish. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001240 EFTA00799669

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 66 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 35 of 100 nsor & Associates Reponing and Transcriplien, lrg. Page 9 1 MR. LEOPOLD: Lewis, we're not going to do 2 3 MR. TEIN: My name is not Lewis. 4 I'm going to finish my question. Okay? 5 MR. LEOPOLD: Do not answer until you hear 6 from me. 7 BY MR. TEIN: 8 Q. Other than conversations that you have had 9 with Mr. Leopold -- I'm not asking about that -- are you 10 aware that Mr. Leopold has filed a lawsuit in federal 11 court seeking fifty million dollars from Jeffrey Epstein 12 on your behalf? 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. 14 Anything that you learn through 15 conversations between you and me, do not answer. 16 Those are protected. If you know through any 17 other realm of knowledge, you may answer. 18 THE WITNESS: No. 19 BY MR. TEIN: 20 Q. You have no idea that Mr. Leopold filed a 21 fifty million-dollar lawsuit on your behalf against 22 Jeffrey Epstein? that. 23 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. 24 Do not answer that question if it's through 25 discussions that you and I had. Outside of that, Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 3Solattl 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001241 EFTA00799670

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 67 of 176 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM entl Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 36 of 100 nsor & Associates Reporting and Truscir'mina, Inc. Page 10 1 2 3 that answer. 4 5 BY MR. DEIN: 6 Q. You didn't know that? 7 MR. LEOPOLD: Don't answer that question. 8 Again, it's attorney/client privilege. Any information you've learned through conversations between you and I are protected. If you know it through any other realm, you may answer. MR. TEIN: Are you going to say that for every question in the deposition, Mr. Leopold? MR. LEOPOLD: When you ask improper questions like that without the proper -- MR. TEIN: You're going to stop your speaking objections right now. Okay? MR, LEOPOLD: Without the proper -- MR. TEIN: You need to stop your speaking objections. Let's continue. MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel, you just asked me a question and I'd going to state it on the record -- MR. TEIN: You need to stop your speaking you may answer. So do not answer that question if that is the only basis by which you understand THE WITNESS: No. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beath Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001242 EFTA00799671

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 68 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 37 of 100 nsor & Associates Reponing anti 'Frame-rip:ion. Int. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Page 11 objections. Check your rules. MR. LEOPOLD: Excuse me. For the record, Counsel asked me a question. I'll state the answer on the record. He asked me the question am I going to be answering that way throughout the deposition. So long as there's improper foundation and predicate asked by the attorney, I will protect my client and I make the record where appropriate. If counsel wishes to ask an 10 appropriate worded question with the proper it foundation and predicate, I will certainly allow 12 the client to answer the question. 13 MR. GOLDBERGER: Why don't you just state 14 attorney/client privilege and just be done with 15 it? 16 17 clear. 18 19 20 21 22 MR. LEOPOLD: I want the record to be MR. TEIN: You want to waste time is what you want to do. You were supposed to be here this morning and you totally broke the deal, the agreement that you had with us if your hearing got cancelled. 23 But let's move on and maybe you'll stop 24 obstructing this deposition. 25 MR. LEOPOLD: I think the record is very Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 37 *I 31$ 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001243 EFTA00799672

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 69 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 38 of 100 nsor & Associates Repantn2 and TtiminiptIon, 1 2 3 4 clear where we stand thus far. Is there a recording taken of this deposition? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. Page 12 5 MR. LEOPOLD: Just make sure that's 6 preserved. 7 ay.ma. 8 Q. Go to Exhibit 20-01 -- well, before you do 9 that." are you aware that a lawyer named Jeffrey 10 Herman filed a lawsuit on your behalf, yes or no? 11 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. 12 Any conversations that you and I have had 13 regarding that, if that is the only way by which 14 you understand how to answer that question, do not 15 answer. It's attorney/client privilege, as well 16 as any conversations you may have had with the 17 attorney from Miami. That is also attorney/client 38 privilege. And I'm assuming -- 19 MR. TEIN: You're actually wrong about the 20 attorney/client privilege. 21 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm assuming Counsel is not 22 asking you to divulge attorney/client -- 23 MR. TEIN: Of course not. 24 BY MR. TEIN: 25 Q. a are you aware that Jeffrey Herman, Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 34 of 314 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001244 EFTA00799673

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 0 6/02/201 7 Page 70 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 39 of 100 nsor & Associates Repartlap and Taaansi mina, Inc 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 BY MR. TEIN: 19 Q. Go ahead. Please answer yes or no. 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Thank you. 22 In fact, you know that Mr. Herman held a 23 press conference after he filed the fifty-million-dollar 24 lawsuit on your behalf, don't you? 25 Page 13 an attorney, filed a fifty-million-dollar lawsuit on your behalf against Jeffrey Epstein, yes or no? MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. HR. TEIN: We've heard the objection 10 times already. MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel, excuse me. MR. TEIN: Just say attorney/client privilege. Stop interrupting my questions. MR. LEOPOLD: I'm entitled to make an objection for the record, which I'm doing, and I'll make the same objection. And if it calls for attorney/client privilege, any conversations you and I have had, do not answer the question. And I think that it might be appropriate, IIIIII for the record, to ask questions via elliallas opposed to figi I think that would be more appropriate for this deposition. After it happened. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Hagan 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001245 EFTA00799674

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 71 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 nt 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 40 of 100 nsor & Associates Reparsins end TrAGIC tiptinn. 1. 2 don't you, yes or no? A. Yes. Page 14 Q. You know that he had a press conference, 4 Q. In fact, let's go to Exhibit 20-01. 5 MR. GOLDBERGER: Look behind you. You'll 6 see it. 7 BY MR. TEIN: Q. Have you ever seen that picture before? A. Yes. Q. Is that a picture of your father, your stepmother and Mr. Herman at the press conference regarding your lawsuit? A. Yes. Q. Now you know that this is a very serious matter, don't you? MR. LEOPOLD: Asked and answered. Objection. MR. GOLDBERGER: All right. You can object. You're representing a witness here, Mr. Leopold. You can object on privilege grounds. You cannot make legal objections. You have no standing to do so. MR. LEOPOLD: I'm going to make them and then -- MR. GOLDBERGER: We're -- Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 40 44310 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001246 EFTA00799675

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 72 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 41 of 100 nsor & Associates Reporting and Transcription, Inc Page 15 1 MR. LEOPOLD: We're going to leave or we're 2 going to take a break, because his demeanor is not 3 appropriate. There's no reason to have this kind 4 of demeanor. If you want to have this kind of 5 demeanor with me -- 6 MR. TEIN: You are obstructing this 7 deposition. 8 MR. GOLDBERGER: Why don't you guys go 9 outside and just talk about -- 10 MR. LEOPOLD: She -- her job is very 11 difficult and she's not going to be able to take 12 us both talking at the same time. 13 MR. GOLDBERGER: Off the record. 14 MR. LEOPOLD: We're not going off the 15 record, Jack. We're not, Jack. Her job is very 16 difficult. I'm going td make the record. 17 I don't think it is appropriate, especially 18 in the small confines of this room, to be very 19 aggressive with this young lady. 20 MR. TEIN: That's not happening. Stop, 21 stop actually -- 22 MR. LEOPOLD: If you're going to interrupt 23 me, we're going to cancel this deposition -- 24 MR. TEIN: Stop misrepresenting. 25 THE COURT REPORTER: I need one at a time, Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 41 44 316 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001247 EFTA00799676

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 73 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 42 of 100 nsor & Associates ;tenoning sad Tranictirion. Inc 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 16 no matter who it is. MR. LEOPOLD: I think we're going to take a break. Perhaps you might want to talk to your co-counsel -- MR. TEIN: I don't need to talk to him. MR. LEOPOLD: But we're going to take a break. MR. TEIN: We're not taking a break unless the witness needs a break. You're obstructing this deposition, Ted. MR. LEOPOLD: Come on, You all want to continue in this demeanor -- MR. TEIN: You're obstructing the deposition. Stop making speeches. We're not discussing this with you. The questions are to your client. Go take your five-minute break. MR. LEOPOLD: Fine. We need to make sure the record's clear and clean. And I want. to make sure, as I've already asked you -- I know that you're one of the best in town -- that this audio -- this needs to be preserved. Okay? MR. TEIN: Go take your five-minute break, Mr. Leopold, now. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 AS el 316 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001248 EFTA00799677

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 74 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM nt 1 EnteredonFLSDDocket07/21/2008 Page43of100 nsor & Associates Ropansn mid Transciirim. 1 2 3 back. 4 Page 17 You were supposed to be here at nine a.m.; it's now after two. Take your break and come MR. LEOPOLD: Okay. If the demeanor keeps 5 up, we will not be here beyond those five minutes. 6 7 8 relax. 9 10 break. 11 MR. GOLDBERGER: Let them take that 12 five-minute break. 13 MR. LEOPOLD: But I would suggest that you 14 take deep breaths. 15 MR. TEIN: Suggest whatever you want. Go 16 take a break. 17 (Thereupon, a recess was taken.) 18 ➢Y MR. TEIN: 19 Q. you agree that giving testimony 20 today at your deposition is something very serious, don't 21 you? MR. TEIN: Take your break and come back. MR. LEOPOLD: Okay. So I suggest that you MR. TEIN: i suggest that you take your 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And you respect the coilif7—Uan't you. 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Let me show you Exhibit 31-001. Can you Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 4101311 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001249 EFTA00799678

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 75 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM nt 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 44 of 100 nsor & Associates keportimp end TransClipnnn. Page 18 1 read that out loud, please. 2 A. Okay. What do you want? 3 Q. Will you read that out loud, please. 4 A. Oh. 5 Q. Thank you. 6 A. Lol hah my baddd...1O1 yah i got some 7 stupid court shit on the 20th...bullshit...and damn you still have court shit with him? Like after so long wow 9 im sorry... well yah well we will definitely havta make 10 plans for sure..because i miss u tons times a million and 11 no no no i love you...o and p.s. i love ur default pic 12 niggaa. Muah xo. 13 Q. Did you send that message last week to a 14 friend of yours on MySpace? 15 A. I wouldn't know. There's no dates and I've 16 deleted that MySpace, so -- 17 Q. We're going to talk about that in a second. 18 A. Okay. 19 Q. Did you send that message last week -- 20 A. Right. 21 O. Let me finish my question. 22 Did you send that message last week to a 23 friend of yours on MySpace? 24 A. I wouldn't know the date, but obviously, 25 it's to a friend. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 44 of 314 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001250 EFTA00799679

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 76 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 45 of 100 sor & Associates ReponinvimlYmnsairion,Inc. Page 19 Q. Did you send that message to a friend of 2 yours on MySpace? 3 A. Sure, yes. 4 Q. Were you referring to this deposition? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Do you find the term n-i-g-g-e-r offensive? 7 A. That's not anywhere in there. 8 Q. What word did you use in there? 9 MR. LEOPOLD: Where are you referring to, 10 Counsel? There's 20 plus words in there. 11 MR. TEIN: Don't make a speaking objection. 12 THE WITNESS: Are you referring to 13 anything -- 14 15 let him ask you the question. 16 BY MR. TEIN: 17 Q. What question were you asking, ? 18 MR. LEOPOLD: She doesn't ask questions. 19 You ask the questions. What is the question 20 pending? 21 BY MR. TEIN: 22 Q. Z3 —The text of your message before tne closing? MR. LEOPOLD: No, Don't -- don't 24 A. Niggaa. leawhat is the last word on there in 25 Q. Don't you find that term offensive? Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 4$ of 316 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001251 EFTA00799680

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 77 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM nt 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 46 of 100 nsor & Associates Repo/lien end Transcription, inn 2 3 4 5 Page 20 A. No. MR. LEOPOLD: Can you spell it for the record, please. THE WITNESS: N-i-g-g -- MR. TEIN: No, no, no. You are not going 6 to be asking questions. 7 8 I'm asking for the record the word to be spelled, 9 because we don't have a video here today. 10 MR. TEIN: These exhibits are part of the 11 record. You -- 12 MR. LEOPOLD: Well, it's not marked as an 13 exhibit. 14 MR. TEIN: Stop interrupting me, 15 Mr. Leopold. I have marked and identified as an 16 exhibit and you will get it. 17 18 identification of this document in the record. 19 MR. TEIN: Mr. Leopold, stop interrupting 20 this deposition. 21 MR. LEOPOLD: What is the exhibit number 22 marked for identification? 23 MR. TEIN: 31-001. 24 MR. LEOPOLD: Do we have copies? Is it on 25 the record anywhere? MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not asking questions. MR. LEOPOLD: There has been no Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 46 el 314 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001252 EFTA00799681

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 78 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 47 of 100 nsor & Associates ;tenoning and Transcription. lAC Page 21 1 BY MR. TEIN: 2 Q. Let me ask you, Sdid you in fact 3 write your friend this message about this deposition? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. So you wrote your triend that this 6 deposition is stupid court s-h-i-t, correct? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Because you think this deposition is stupid 9 court s-h-i-t, don't you? 10 A. No. 11 Q. You wrote that to your friend, didn't you? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. You think that court is stupid, don't you? 14 A. In some cases. 15 Q. And you think that court is bull s-h-i-t, 16 don't you? 17 A. No. 18 Q. And you think this deposition is bull 19 s-h-i-t, don't you? 20 A. No. 21 Q. You wrote that to your friend, didn't you? 22 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and 23 answered. 24 MR. TEIN: That's not an objection. 25 BY MR. TEIN: Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 eel 316 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001253 EFTA00799682

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 79 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM nt 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 48 of 100 sor & Associates Reporting sod Transcdplion, Mt. 1. 2 Page 22 Q. You wrote that to your friend, didn't you? MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and answered, for the fourth time. 4 MR. TEIN: You are improperly objecting, 5 Mr. Leopold. You have no grounds to object. And 6 that's not an objection. 7 MR. LEOPOLD: It is an objection. 8 MR. TEIN: Then terminate the deposition if 9 you think it's been asked and answered. 10 11 from just making an objection to the form of the 12 question. As the courts well know, and if you 13 practice here in West Palm Beach, many of the 14 judges require you to set the objection with 15 specificity. And I will do that. And if you 16 don't want me to, you can make the record. But I 17 will do that. 18 MR. TEIN: Here's what we'll do, Ted. You 19 can -- I will allow you to reserve an objection to 20 form for every single one of my questions. 21 Otherwise, all you're doing is obstructing. 22 23 MR. TEIN: Of course; because you want to 24 obstruct. 25 MR. LEOPOLD: All right. MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel, I am not precluded MR. LEOPOLD: I won't do that. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001254 EFTA00799683

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 80 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM 9 10 11 12 nt 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 49 of 100 nsor & Associates Reporting sod Transcription, loc. Page 23 1 BY MR. TEIN: 2 Q. you think that giving testimony 3 today, under oath, is bull s-h-i-t, don't you? 4 A. No. 5 Q. And you wrote that to your friend on G MySpace last week, didn't you? 7 HR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and 8 answered. THE WITNESS: No, I did not. BY MR. TEIN: Q. You didn't write this exhibit? A. I wrote that, but I didn't write what you 13 said. 14 15 16 you write that? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. 19 A. 20 informed that it was a deposition. 21 22 about what happened when you went to Jeff Epstein's house Q. You wrote in this exhibit, "I got some stupid court s-h-i-t on the 20th. Bull s-h-i-t." Didn't Referring to this deposition, didn't you? Referring to the court. I was later O. I'm going to ask you some questions now Yee y Okay' 24 A. Oh-huh. 25 Q. When the police interviewed you one month • .0 Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 MOM 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001255 EFTA00799684

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 81 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM p ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 50 of 100 • nsor & Associates Transtriptim. Page 24 1 after you went to Epstein's house, you swore on your 2 mother's grave that you and Epstein did not engage in sex 3 of any kind? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Didn't you tell that to the police? 6 A. Yes. And I will continue. I have never 7 had sex with him. Q. Did what happened upstairs at Jeff 9 Epstein's house take you completely by surprise, 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Now the civil complaint that you filed 12 against Mr. Epstein for fifty million dollars alleged 13 that you were totally shocked by what happened when you 14 got there. 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Were you totally shocked by what happened 17 when you got to Epstein's house? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. You didn't expect it at all, did you? 20 A. No. 21 Q. You had absolutely no idea why your friend 22 Sas taking you to Epstein's house, right? 23 A. I was informed it was a massage. 24 Q. All you thought that it was going to be was 25 a massage, correct? Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001256 EFTA00799685

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 82 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 51 of 100 nsor & Associates Reporting anal Itatucciption, Inc. 1 2 3 never said anything to you on the telephone about sexual 4 activity with Epstein, did she? 5 A. No. 6 Q. And before you got to Epstein's house Page 25 INN A. Yes. O. Before you got to Epstein's house 7 lillillinever sent you a message over the Internet about 8 sexual activity with Epstein, did she? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Did ever try to convince you to 11 engage in any sexual activity with Epstein? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Did every try to convince 14 you to engage in any sexual activity with Epstein? 15 A. I don't know who is. 16 Q. Do you have a friend 17 A. No. 18 Q. Okay. Before you went so Epstein's house 19 did anyone call or e-mail you to induce you to engage in 20 sexual activity with Epstein? 21 A. No. 22 0. So you're sure that before you got to 23 Epstein's house no one tried to persuade you to engage in 24 sexual activity with Jeffrey Epstein? 25 A. No. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 SI o1314 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001257 EFTA00799686

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 83 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 52 of 100 nsor & Associates Reporting and Trascrinion, Inc. Page 26 Q. You're sure that-- let me ask the question 2 again. 3 You're sure that before you got to 4 Epstein's house no one tried to persuade you to engage in 5 sexual activity with Epstein for money. Are you? 6 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and 7 answered. 8 THE WITNESS: No. And I've already 9 answered that a bazillion times. 10 BY MR. TEIN: 11 Q. He's coaching you now. So I'm going to ask 12 the question -- 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel, I've made an 14 objection for the record. 15 MR. TEIN: Stop speaking. 16 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not going to stop 17 speaking. You can't interrupt me when I'm making 18 the record. 19 MR. TEIN: You're coaching the witness. 20 MR. LEOPOLD: Counsel -- 21 MR. TEIN: Stop coaching the witness. 22 BY MR. TEIN: 23 Q. let me ask you -- 24 MR. LEOPOLD: If you continue to -- 25 MR. TEIN: Stop interrupting my questions. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 . 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 52 OM 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001258 EFTA00799687

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 84 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Qpi4lypent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 53 of 100 nsor & Associates Rep.-mins end Transoripion. Inc Page 27 1 MR. LEOPOLD: If you do it one more time, 2 we're leaving. 3 BY MR. TEIN: 4 O. IIIIIIIPI 5 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm going to make the record. 6 You cannot interrupt me when I'm making the 7 record. Out of professional conduct, you cannot 8 do that. I'm entitled to make the record. I made 9 an objection, asked and answered. Your demeanor 10 is inappropriate. You're willing and you are able 11 and you're responsible to ask a question in a 12 professional manner, and ask the question and once 13 you get the answer, to either follow up on it or 14 move on, but not continuously browbeat and ask the 15 same question over and over because you don't like 16 the answer. 17 MR. 'MIN: Calm down, sir. 18 MR. LEOPOLD: Trust me, I'm very calm here. 19 When I'm not calm, you'll know it. I'm very calm. 20 So please continue on. But I will not 21 allow you to continue to harass her in the 22 demeanor that you're doing. Ask her a question 23 and move on. 24 MR. TEIN: Are you done? 1I 25 MR. LEOPOLD: Thank you. I am. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 $30316 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001259 EFTA00799688

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 85 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 54 of 100 nsor & Associates Flonnniim nil Innscciptinn, Inc. 54 01311 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 28 MR. TEIN: Stop misrepresenting the record and calm down. I'm going to ask my question. Stop it. BY MR. TEIN: Q. MR. LEOPOLD: I think the record is very clear. MR. GOLDBERGER: Let me just clarify something. When you object to the form of a question, you're not instructing the witness not to answer the question, are you? MR. LEOPOLD: No. And I'm not making that objection; only on attorney/client privilege. MR. TEIN: Will you stop speaking now so I can ask my question? Are you done? Okay. I'm going to ask my question. BY MR. TEIN: O. Listen, Ill" -- MR. LEOPOLD: Hold on. Stop. I've been doing this for 20 plus years and have met a lot of attorneys, but I've never had an experience like this where I've -- MR. TEN: Stop your speeches. MR. LEOPOLD: If you continue to do this, whether it's with me or with my client, I will not Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd.; Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001260 EFTA00799689

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 86 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Qgq igient 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 55 of 100 nsor & Associates Repartees And Transcription. lac. Page 29 1 2 3 Mr. Goldberger knows all this, because I know that 4 he wouldn't do this. So I will not put up with 5 it. And I think it's highly inappropriate to do 6 this with this child sitting here, the way you're 7 acting, primarily towards me, and I will not put 8 up with it. 9 MR. TEIN: Will you please stop your speech 10 so I can ask questions? 11 HR. LEOPOLD: So long as you act 12 professionally, I will do so. But if you continue 13 to do it this way, I will leave. 14 MR. TEIN: Suit yourself. 15 BY MR. TEIN: 16 Q. fl are you sure that before you got to 17 Epstein's house no one tried to persuade you to engage in 18 sexual activity with Epstein for money? 19 MR. LEOPOLD: Asked and answered. 20 Objection. 21 MR. TEIN: Did you get her answer? 22 THE COURT REPORTER: No, I did not. put up with it and I don't need to put up with it and it's not appropriate. And I'm sure 23 THE WITNESS: I'm sure. 24 BY N.R. TEIN: 25 Q. Let me ask you a few questions about your Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 55 01311 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001261 EFTA00799690

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 87 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 56 of 100 sor & Associates Ropaning tad Transcriptica. Page 30 1 contact with Jeffrey Epstein. Okay? 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 did he? 9 A. No. 10 Q. 11 never spoken to Jeff, had you? 12 A. No. 13 Q. And before you got to Epstein's house you 14 had never met Jeff? 15 A. Correct. 16 Q. Before you got to Epstein's house you had 17 never told Jeff that you were under 18, right? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Before you got to Epstein's house had you 20 ever told Jeffrey that you were under 18? 21 A. No. I never spoke to the man before that. 22 Q. And you only went to Jeff Epstein's house 23 that one time three years ago, correct? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. You never went there again, correct? A. (Witness nods head up and down.) Q. Jeff never e-mailed you, did he? A. No. Q. Jeff never text messaged you, did he? A. No. Jeff never chatted in a chat room with you, Before you got to Epstein's house you had Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 St ol 311 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001262 EFTA00799691

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 88 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Qrient 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 57 of 100 nsor & Associates KOrddlina and TrallaCtictiOn, Inc 1 A. No. 2 Page 31 Q. All right. Let me ask you two final areas 3 of questioning about this and we'll move onto something 4 else. Okay? 5 A. Uh-huh. Yes. I'm sorry. 6 Q. Before you got to Epstein's did anyone 7 associated with Epstein ever call you on the phone and 8 try to persuade, induce, entice or coerce you to engage 9 in any sexual activity? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Before you got to Epstein's did anybody 12 associated with Epstein ever contact you on the Internet 13 and try to persuade, induce, entice or coerce you to 14 engage in any sexual activity? 15 A. No. 16 Q. who told you that when you got to 17 Jeff Epstein's house you should lie to Jeff about your 18 age? 19 A. 20 Q. Was it or was it the other girl in 21 the car who you rode over with to Epstein's house? 22 A. 23 Q. Who was the other girl in the car with you 24 that day? 25 A. I honestly don't know. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 51 of 316 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001263 EFTA00799692

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 89 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Rpcytment 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 58 of 100 nsor & Associates 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 her name, but she was like really dark, kind of like a B Spanish girl? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q• 11 A• 12 Q• 13 A. 14 Q• 15 your age to Jeff Epstein? 16 A. Yes, sir. 1/ Q. And told you that if you weren't 18, 18 Epstein wouldn't let you into his house, right? 19 A. That's -- yes, yes. 20 Q• 21 when you first met Jeff. Okay? 22 A. Sure. 23 Q• 24 out how old you were, right? 25 A. Excuse me? ItoportInA mu, Traasciiphon, inc. Page 32 Q. Had you ever seen her before? A. No, sir. Q. You told the police that when you rode over to Epstein's you had no idea who she was, right? A. Correct. Q. You told the police that you didn't know Those were your words, right? Yes. Do you now know who she is? No, sir. So it was Illilwho told you to lie about All right. Let's talk for a minute about When you first met Jeff he tried to find Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 ol3it 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001264 EFTA00799693

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 90 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM -4 ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 59 of 100 nsor & Associates ReporginE and Trantoiptinn, Inc. Page 33 1 Q. When you first met Jeff he tried to find 2 out how old you were, right? 3 A. Not when we first introduced each other; 4 when we get upstairs, then, yes. Q. During the massage Jeff asked you how old 6 you were, correct? 7 A. Yes, yes. 8 0. Now hadn't you already told Jeff's 9 ass:stant, the one who walked you upstairs, that you went 10 to college and had just moved down here from Ohio? 11 A. I never spoke to the lady. 12 Q. Do you want to rethink that answer? 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Is that a question? 14 BY MR. TEIN: 15 Q. Do you want to rethink that answer? 16 A. No. I didn't really speak with her that 17 much. 18 Q. Do you want to try to refresh your memory 19 on that? 20 MR. LEOPOLD: Do you have something to 21 refresh her memory with? 22 MR. TEIN: Do you want to stop making 23 speaking objections? 24 MR. LEOPOLD: No. But to refresh someone's 25 memory, you show them a document. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Pain Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 GO of 314 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001265 EFTA00799694

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 91 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM l D ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 60 of 100 il 00 01311 nsor & Associates Reparttrop mid Traccoriyioc, Page 34 1 N.R. TEIN: I know how to do this. 2 MR. LEOPOLD: 'then show her a document. 3 MR. TEIN: Stop speaking. 4 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not going to stop 5 speaking. I'm going to continue to make the 6 record. 7 MR. TEIN: You're obstructing. Please 8 stop. 9 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not obstructing. But if 10 you want to refresh her recollection, you need to 11 show her something. 12 That's not a proper question. I object to 13 the foundation and the predicate of that question. 14 MR. TEIN: Are you done? 15 MR. LEOPOLD: I am now. Thank you. 16 BY MR. TEIN: 17 O. Do you want to try to refresh your memory 18 as to whether you had any conversation with the woman who 19 walked you upstairs in Epstein's house in which you told 20 her that you went to college and had just moved down from 21 Ohio? 22 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Object to the 23 form of the question. Lack of foundation and 24 predicate. 25 BY MR. TEIN: Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001266 EFTA00799695

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 92 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 teredonFLSpOlocket07/21/2008 Page 61 01100 nsor Associates Ropartino and Transcription, lot Page 35 1 2 3 4 memory that in fact you told Mr. Epstein's assistant, the 5 one who walked you upstairs, that you went to college and 6 you had just moved down here from Ohio? 7 A. I don't remember saying that, but if you -- 0 I don't remember saying that myself, so -- Q. You can answer the question. A. Sure. Q. Is there anything that would refresh your 9 Q. That would be a lie, right? 10 A. No. 1 really don't remember. 11 Q. So you told Jeff that you were 18 years 12 old, correct? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Do you remember Detective Pagan of 15 the Police Department, Palm Beach Police Department? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Do you remember you spoke to her? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Do you remember that you told Detective 20 Pagan that when you lied about your age to Jeff you said 21 it really fast because you didn't want to make it sound 22 like you were lying? 23 A. 1 don't romombor the words exa 24 do remember telling her I told him I was 18. 25 Q. And do you remember telling Detective Pagan Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 IS o(316 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001267 EFTA00799696

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 93 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 62 of 100 nsor & Associates Reporting end Transeriplinn, lett. Page 36 1 that when you lied to Epstein about your age that you 2 said it really fast so Epstein wouldn't realize you were 3 Ise:Jig? 4 A. No, I don't remember saying those words 5 exactly to her. I remember telling her that I told 6 Epstein I was 18. 7 Q. Does it sound right to you that you told 8 Detective Pagan that you said your age really fast to 9 Epstein -- 10 MS. BELOHLAVEK: Objection. Asked and 11 answered. 12 BY MR. TEIN: 13 Q. -- so he wouldn't think that you were 14 lying? 15 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and 16 answered, lack of foundation, mischaracterization 17 of her earlier testimony. She's already answered 18 that question. 19 BY MR. TEIN: 20 Q. You can answer it. 21 MR. LEOPOLD: Same objection. It's been 22 asked and answered. 23 You can answer. I''ve made the objection. 24 THE WITNESS: I forget the question, now. 25 MoMM Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001268 EFTA00799697

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 94 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Qpgyiment 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 63 of 100 sor & Associates Raponiis Doi Truiscription, lac. Page 37 1 BY MR. TEIN: Q. Let me put it again. 3 Does it sound right to you that you told Detective Pagan that when you lied about your age to 5 Jeffrey Epstein, you said it really fast because you 6 didn't want to make it sound like you were lying? 7 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Lack of 8 foundation, asked and answered. 9 THE WITNESS: I could have possibly said 10 that, yes. 11 BY MR. TEIN: 12 Q. You didn't want Mr. Epstein to know that 13 you were lying about your age, right? 14 A. Correct. 15 Q.. You didn't want Mr. Epstein to know that 16 you were not 18 yet, right? 17 A. Correct. 18 Q. You wanted Mr. Epstein to believe that you 19 really were 18, right? 20 A. Correct. 21 Q. Do you remember when Mr. Epstein asked 22 where you went to school? 23 A. Yea. 24 Q. And you told Mr. Epstein you went to 25 Wellington, right? Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 430314 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001269 EFTA00799698

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 95 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 EnteredonFLSDDocket07/21/2008 Page 64 of 100 Difnsor & Associates Roprintna and Thinicririum. Page 38 1 A. Yes. 2 O. Was that the truth? 3 A. No. 4 O. In fact, you went to Royal Palm, right? 5 A. Yes. 6 O. So you lied to Mr. Epstein again, correct? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Is Wellington the college that you told 9 Jeff's assistant that you were attending? 10 A. I don't remember having that conversation 11 with her, so I wouldn't know if that's what I said. 12 O. That was a lie, though, wasn't it? 13 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection to the form of the 14 question, lack of foundation. You're making an 15 assumption. She just answered you she can't tell 16 you that. 17 MR. TEIN: Speaking objection. And you 18 well know that, Mr. Leopold. 19 MR. LEOPOLD: She can't answer that 20 question. The way you phrased that question, 21 you're purposely making her not be honest in her 22 testimony. She can't answer a question like that. 23 She doesn't remember. So then you say, "So you 24 were lying." That's improper and you know that. 25 That's not a proper question. And any attorney Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 640311 08-80736-CV-MARRA 00)270 EFTA00799699

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 96 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM D c ment 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 65 of 100 sor & Associates Reparcing and Tronscriponst. Inc 1 2 3 4 Page 39 that would do that to a witnesses or to a person that's sitting in this chair is not acting professionally. You can't ask a question like that. You can do it, but it's not proper. And 5 I'm sure you weren't trained that way, certainly 6 not ethically. 7 MR. TEIN: Will you stop? 8 MR. LEOPOLD: I'm not going to stop, 9 because the way you're asking that question is 10 improper and you know it. 11 MR. TEIN: You're losing your cool. 12 BY MR. TEIN: 13 O. Ms. 14 MR. LEOPOLD: Trust me. I'm very calm. 15 When I lose my cool, you'll know it. 16 MR. TEIN: I do know it. 17 BY MR. TEIN: 18 Q. Ms. IIIIIIIII Mr. Epstein never asked you 19 to do anything other than massage him, correct? 20 A. Incorrect; because he asked me to take off 21 my bra, so that would be two things he's asked me to do. 22 Q. Other than asking you to take your bra off, 23 Mr. Epstein never asked you to do anything with him other 24 than massage, correct? 25 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Foundation, Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 55 ot 111 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001271 EFTA00799700

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 97 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 ntered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 66 of 100 nsor Associates HoportinE aid Tranictiption, lnc. 1 2 3 BY MR. TEIN: predicate. THE WITNESS: Correct. Page 40 4 Q. You.told the police, in your words, that 5 you did not whack him off, right? 6 A. Correct. 7 Q. What does that mean? 8 A. Whack, like whacking off? 9 Q. Your term, what does that mean? 10 A. Masturbating. 11 Q. Mr. Epstein never tried at any time to grab 12 you: hand, did he? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Mr. Epstein never tried to put your hand 15 anywhere, did he? 16 A. No. 17 Q. At no time did you touch Mr. Epstein's 18 penis, did you? 19 A. No. 20 Q. And he did not touch you, correct? 21 A. Incorrect. t2 Q. Well, you told the police, "At no time did 23 he touch me." Were you lying to the police then? 24 A. No. Well, I wasn't being fully truthful, 25 but I wasn't lying. Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 f4e1311 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001272 EFTA00799701

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 98 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM ent 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2008 Page 67 of 100 nsor & Associates Reporting and Transcription.inc. ST el 315 1 2 3 you say that to the police? 4 A. Yeah. Page 4] Q. You told the police twice when you spoke to Pagan that "at no time did he touch me." Didn't 5 Q. And you're saying that that was not fully 6 truthful. Is that what you're saying now? 7 A. Correct. 8 Q. And you're saying if you're not fully 9 trtthful, that's not a lie. Correct? 10 A. You took that out of context like really 11 bad. I didn't mean like that. Touching my legs and -- 12 he never kept his hands to himself the entire time. 13 That's what I'm trying to say. 14 Q. You told the police, "At no times did he 15 touch me." You agree with that, correct? 16 A. No, I don't agree with that, because he did 17 touch me. 18 Q. Did you tell the police that he did not 19 touch you, yes or no? 20 A. It's a possibility, but I do not remember. 21 Q. Okay. And you did not have any type of sex 22 with Jeff, correct? 23 A. No. 24 Q. And you did not have any type of oral sex 25 with Jeff, correct? Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite SOO - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 08-80736-CV-MARRA 00 I 273 EFTA00799702

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 99 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM D ent 1 EnteredonFLSDDocket07/21/2008 Page 68 of 100 nsor & Associates ReToning tail Trassotiptunn..Inc.. . 2 3 4 Page 42 A. NO. Q. No type of intercourse with Jeff, correct? A. Correct. Q. All right. Let's talk about what happened 5 after the massage was over. 6 A. Okay. 7 Q. After the massage, you told Epstein that 8 you wanted to bring your twin sister back so she could 9 make some money, correct? 10 A. Incorrect 11 Q. Your twin sister is gill right? 12 A. Correct. 13 Q. And you love very much, don't you? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. And when you left the house you were joking 16 with the other girls, weren't you? 17 A. Incorrect. 18 Q. Well, when and the other girl in the 19 car that day made their statements to the police they 20 told the police that you were joking afterwards. Are you 21 saying that they were lying to the police about that? 22 A. No. But a question or -- questions from 23 like she asked me questions, but it wasn't 24 joking. She was kind of like in a happy way, like, "Oh, 25 what did you do? What did you do?" Like those kind of Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 '1e110 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001274 EFTA00799703

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 403-19 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/02/2017 Page 100 of 176 Case 9:08-cv-80804-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/2112008 Page 69 of 100 nsor & Associates Reims-dapand Transaiptinn. Jix Page 43 1 things, but it wasn't joking about it at all. 2 Q. You joked about it, didn't you? 3 A. No. 4 Q. You said to IIIIIIIthat if you did this 5 every weekend you'd be rich, didn't you? 6 A. No. That's what Lold me. 7 Q. You didn't tell that to IIIIIPP 8 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Asked and 9 answered. 10 THE WITNESS: No. 1 1 BY MR. TEIN: 12 Q. After you left Epstein's house you took the 13 money and you went shopping with and the other 14 girl in the car, correct? 15 A. Incorrect. I didn't spend any of the 16 money. 17 Q. You went to Marshall's, didn't you? 18 A. I went along, yes, but I didn't -- 19 Q. You went shopping with them at Marshall's, 20 didn't you? 21 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. 22 THE WITNESS: I guess you could say that. 23 MR. LEOPOLD: Objection. Lack of predicate 24 and foundation. Mischaracterization of earlier 25 testimony. No010 Ph. 561.682.0905 - Fax. 561.682.1771 1655 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 500 - West Palm Beach, FL 33401 08-80736-CV-MARRA 001275 EFTA00799704