nt representation that “/T]/he SDFL indicated a willingness to defer to the State the length of incarceration...” See Tab 1, May 19, 2008 Letter from J. Sloman, p. 2. This statement is simply not true. Contrary to Mr. Sloman’s assertion, federal prosecutors refused to accept what the State believed to be app

ent representation that “/T]he SDFL indicated a willingness to defer to the State the length of incarceration...” See Tab 1, May 19, 2008 Letter from J. Sloman, p. 2. This statement is simply not true. Contrary to Mr. Sloman’s assertion, federal prosecutors refused to accept what the State believed to be app

the Government's previously made representation that it is not vouching for the veracity of any claim by any identified individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. Davis (10/25/07). Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys execute the rider / ackn

ts of victims who are not parties to this litigation Suppl. Box #3 P-013282 Thru P-013283 7/9/08 Email from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, K. Atkinson, and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger letter re victim notification Attorney-Client Privilege Work product Deliberative Proce

novo review of the investigation and facilitated such review at the highest levels of the Department of Justice. " Tab 1, May 19, 2008 Letter from J. Sloman, p. 5,1 3. The Truth: • CEOS' review, concluded in May 2008, was neither independent nor de nova o CEOS' review was not "independent:" • who co

n's attorneys stating that "I intend to notify the victims by letter after COB Thursday [two days later]." See Tab 34, November 27, 2007 Email from J. Sloman to J. Lelkowitz. 42. The morning of November 28, attorneys for Mr. Epstein faxed a letter to Assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher, requesting a

ts of victims who are not parties to this litigation Suppl. Box #3 P-013282 Thru P-013283 7/9/08 Email from A. Marie Villafafia to A. Acosta, J. Sloman, K. Atkinson, and FBI re proposed response to Goldberger letter re victim notification Attorney-Client Privilege Work product Deliberative Proce

the Government's previously made representation that it is not vouching for the veracity of any claim by any identified individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. Davis (10/25/07). Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys execute the rider / ackn

the Government's previously made representation that it is not vouching for the veracity of any claim by any identified individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. Davis (10/25/07). Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys execute the rider / ackn

sel, confirming that "I understand that the plea and sentence will occur on or before the January 4th [2008] date." See October 31, 2007 Email from J. Sloman to J. Lefkowitz (emphasis added). On November 5, 2007, despite Mr. Sloman's having sent the October 31 email only a week earlier, after learning th

the Government's previously made representation that it is not vouching for the veracity of any claim by any identified individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. MO 0/25/07). Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys execute the rider / acknowled

the Government's previously made representation that it is not vouching for the veracity of any claim by any identified individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. (10/25/07). Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys execute the rider / acknowled

the Government's previously made representation that it is not vouching for the =un ity of any claim by any identified individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. (10/25/07). Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys execute the rider / acknowled

ts responsibility to select the attorney representative for the alleged victims to an independent third-party." See Tab I, May 19, 2008 Letter from J. Sloman, p. 4, f.3. The Truth: • That such an assignment was the SDFL's "unilateral" decision is false. Before the SDFL decided to assign selection of th

the Government's previously made representation that it is not vouching for the veracity of any claim by any identified individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. (10/25/07). Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys execute the rider / acknowled

the Government's previously made representation that it is not vouching for the veracity of any claim by any identified individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. (10/25/07). Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys execute the rider / acknowled

the Government's previously made representation that it is not vouching for the veracity of any claim by any identified individual. See Letter from J. Sloman to E. (10/25/07). Second, please note also that we do not understand your request that Mr. Epstein and his attorneys execute the rider / acknowled