Lefkowitz also stated that had misleadingly used the term "friend" rather than the more accurate term "boyfriend" to describe who had recommended Ocariz. Id. at 268. Lefkowitz further stated the boyfriend had a business relationship with Ocariz and that the boyfriend would have financially benefitt

idea of the charges that we had planned to bring as related to 18 USC 2255." Id. The e-mail also asked permission from Epstein's counsel to send to Ocariz a copy of parts of the plea agreement: "With respect to question 2 [a question from Ocariz regarding "[w]hen will it be possible to see the plea ag

ona is the lead federal 11 prosecutor that's on the federal part of this case. 12 Okay? 13 A. No. 14 Q. So does it refresh your memory that Ocariz 15 is the good friend of Marie Villafona's boyfriend? 16 A. Not at all. 17 Q. Does it refresh your memory that Villafona 18 tried to get Ep

friend of Marie Villafona's boyfriend? 16 A. Not at all. 17 Q. Does it refresh your memory that Villafona 18 tried to get Epstein to pay for Ocariz to represent you 19 in the federal case? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Do you know if Detective Recarey has spoken 22 with your father? 23 A. No. 24

the victims, and that a Special Master, working pro bono, should make the selection. Accordingly, the matter was submitted to a Special Master, and Ocariz was not selected as the attorney for the victims. Despite this resolution, Epstein's counsel continue to allege that my suggestion of Ocariz to ser

my boyfriend,-'). At the time, I identified Ocariz as a friend of a close friend. Epstein's attorneys rejected the other suggestions and selected Ocariz. After conferring with the First Assistant and the U.S. Attorney, we decided that, despite the terms of the non-prosecution agreement, the Office sh

n the more accurate term "boyfriend" to describe the connection. Id. at 268 Lefkowitz further stated the boyfriend had a business relationship with Ocariz and that the boyfriend would have financially benefitted from the presumably lucrative referral of sexual assault cases against Epstein to Ocariz.

idea of the charged that we had planned to bring as related to 18 USC 2255." Id. The e- mail also asked permission from Epstein's counsel to send to Ocariz a copy of parts of the plea agreement: "With respect to question 2 [a question from Ocariz regarding "[w]hen will it be possible to see the plea ag

idea of the charged that we had planned to bring as related to 18 USC 2255." Id. The e- mail also asked permission from Epstein's counsel to send to Ocariz a copy of parts of the plea agreement: "With respect to question 2 [a question from Ocariz regarding "[w]hen will it be possible to see the plea ag

n the more accurate term "boyfriend" to describe the connection. Id. at 268 Lefkowitz further stated the boyfriend had a business relationship with Ocariz and that the boyfriend would have financially benefitted from the presumably lucrative referral of sexual assault cases against Epstein to Ocariz.

idea of the charges that we had planned to bring as related to 18 USC 2255." Id. The e-mail also asked permission from Epstein's counsel to send to Ocariz a copy of parts of the plea agreement: "With respect to question 2 [a question from Ocariz regarding "[w]hen will it be possible to see the plea ag

Lefkowitz also stated that had misleadingly used the term "friend" rather than the more accurate term "boyfriend" to describe who had recommended Ocariz. Id. at 268. Lefkowitz further stated the boyfriend had a business relationship with Ocariz and that the boyfriend would have financially benefitt

r, and Ocariz was not selected as the attorney for the victims. Despite this resolution, Epstein's counsel continue to allege that my suggestion of Ocariz to serve as counsel for the victims represents a conflict of interest and that I should be removed from prosecuting the case and/or disciplined. The

sel with a series of possible attorss, including Humberto Ocariz ("Ocariz"), who is a friend of my boyfriend, E.J. (M"). At the time, I identified Ocariz as a friend of a "good friend." Epstein's attorneys rejected the other suggestions and selected Ocariz. After conferring with the First Assistant a

iz is the good friend of Marie Villafona's boy friend? A, Not at all. Q. Does it refresh your memory that Villafona tried to get Epstein to pay for Ocariz to represent you in the federal case? A. No. Q. Do you know if Detective Recarey has spoken with your father? A. No. Q. Do you know if Detective

s. Q. Marie Villafona is the lead federal prosecutor that's on the federal part of this case. Okay? A. No. Q. So does it refresh your memory that Ocariz is the good friend of Marie Villafona's boy friend? A, Not at all. Q. Does it refresh your memory that Villafona tried to get Epstein to pay for Oc

nt the unnamed women in claims against Epstein). 26. The next day, AUSA advised the defense that she was removing one of the alternatives to Mr. Ocariz from our consideration, on the basis that "one of his partners is married to an AUSA here," and explained that, because of that personal relationshi

h a list of potential attorney representatives, and yj , Mr. Lefkowitz, were provided with information in writing regarding a friendship between Mr. Ocariz and a close friend of mine, and yai decided that Mt Ocariz was the best selection. Notwithstanding your agreement on the selection of Mr. Ocariz, o

nt the unnamed women in claims against Epstein). 26. The next day, AUSA advised the defense that she was removing one of the alternatives to Mr. Ocariz from our consideration, on the basis that "one of his partners is married to an AUSA here," and explained that, because of that personal relationshi

5 9/27/07 10:52 am Lefk E-mail forwarding questions from Ocariz 6 9/27/07 3:06 pm Lefk E-mail to Lefkowitz responding to his concerns about Ocariz's questions EFTA00190106 7 10/3/07 Lefk E-mail to schedule conference call with 3:15 pm memo regarding attorney representative selection pro

th you. We exchanged stick with Bert." had and we best. Then From Sen • :43 AM To: Sub . . 1 question: page 2, 3rd par. states "since mr. Ocariz had been told that you concurred in his selection ... I informed (him) of the office's decision to use a special master.. ." I'm a little confused

et me address your objections to the draft Victim Notification Letter. Your concerns regarding the § 2255 litigation are unfounded. As you know, Mr. Ocariz had been told that he would be the attorney representative for the victims. As a matter of professional courtesy, he was informed that the Office d

represented parties who must be contacted only through their counsel. Your concerns regarding the § 2255 litigation are unfounded. As you know, Mr. Ocariz had been told that he would be the attorney representative for the victims. As a matter of professional courtesy, he was informed that the Office d

"good friend in the Appellate Division." Ms. account was misleading, as it omitted that this "good friend" was her live-in boyfriend, and that Mr. Ocariz was his former law-school roommate. When we discovered this independently, we objected. Only then did the SDFL propose assigning the selection proc

se 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. EFTA00207615 JAY P. LEFKOWITZ, ESQ. DECEMBER 13, 2007 PAGE 2 OF 5 I informed you that I selected Mr. Ocariz because he was a friend and classm

to settle civil claims. First. she inappropriately attempted to nominate ilumben "Herr Ocariz for attorney representative, despite the fact that Mr. Ocariz has a longstanding relationship with Ms. Villafana. Mr. Ocariz turns out to be a very good personal friend and law school classmate of Ms. Villathn

friend and law school classmate of ms. boyfriend, a fact she assiduously kept hidden from counsel. We also learned from Ms. that she shared with Ocariz the summary of charges the government was considering against Mr. Epstein. Even after your Office conceded that it was inappmpriate for its attorne

present the unnamed women in claims against Epstein). 26. The next day, advised the defense that she was removing one of the alternatives to Mr. Ocariz from our consideration, on the basis that "one of his partners is married to an AUSA here," and explained that, because of that personal relationshi