Skip to content
Case File
d-20447House OversightOther

U.S. Attorney’s Office discusses deadline extension for Jeffrey Epstein case with high‑profile defense team

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #012666
Pages
1
Persons
2

Summary

The passage reveals internal communications about a potential federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, mentions a deadline tied to a 2007 agreement, and lists a roster of prominent attorneys (including Email from First Assistant U.S. Attorney refusing a request for pre‑indictment information Reference to a September 24, 2007 Agreement that Epstein must obey if prosecution proceeds Deadline extensio

This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.

View Source Collection

Persons Referenced (2)

Tags

jeffrey-epsteinlegal-strategyhighprofile-defense-counselsouthern-district-of-floridaprocedural-deadlinefederal-prosecutionlegal-exposurepotential-settlement-enforcemehouse-oversightmoderate-importance
Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Internal memo discusses federal prosecution strategy for Jeffrey Epstein and applicability of the petite policy

The document reveals that a U.S. Attorney's Office is evaluating whether to pursue federal charges against Jeffrey Epstein despite state proceedings, indicating potential high‑level prosecutorial deci Memo evaluates federal jurisdiction over commercial sexual exploitation of children in Epstein case. Discusses the 'petite policy' and its inapplicability due to overlapping state charges. Mentions t

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Letter from Kirkland & Ellis urging a de novo federal review of Jeffrey Epstein prosecution

The passage reveals internal legal strategy to challenge a federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, cites a non‑prosecution agreement, and mentions a subpoena issued by Assistant U.S. Attorney Villafan Kirkland & Ellis argues the Department's prior review was limited and not de novo. Reference to a Non‑Prosecution Agreement (NPA) that should have precluded further federal action. Assistant U.S. Att

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Allegations of Prosecutorial Misconduct in Federal Jeffrey Epstein Case

The passage alleges that senior U.S. Attorney Office staff (AUSA Weinstein, FAUSA Sloman, U.S. Attorney Acosta) disclosed case‑specific information and possibly offered financial inducements to witnes AUSA Weinstein allegedly disclosed plea‑negotiation details and warned a defense‑contact about media FAUSA Sloman reportedly sent non‑case‑specific information to defense, contradicting internal poli

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Federal prosecutors admit backing down on victim notifications in Jeffrey Epstein case after pressure from his attorneys

The passage reveals that U.S. Attorney’s Office officials altered victim‑notification procedures in 2013 due to objections from Epstein’s lawyers, suggesting possible prosecutorial misconduct and a co Federal prosecutors admitted in 2013 they altered victim‑notification obligations after pressure fro Former federal prosecutor Frances Hakes and Kenneth Staff are cited as having consulted with Epste

2p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Debate Over Whether Jeffrey Epstein’s Federal Non‑Prosecution Deal Violated Victims’ Rights

The passage reveals that U.S. attorneys concealed a federal non‑prosecution agreement from alleged victims and possibly violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, suggesting a potential prosecutorial mis Federal non‑prosecution agreement with Epstein kept secret from victims in 2008. U.S. attorneys sent letters to victims describing an ongoing federal investigation despite the agree Assistant U.S. At

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Allegations that Federal Grand Jury Subpoenas Violate Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non‑Prosecution Agreement

The passage outlines a potential breach of a 2007 Non‑Prosecution Agreement (NPA) by the U.S. Attorney’s Office (USAO) and federal grand jury, suggesting a procedural misstep that could be pursued for Epstein entered a Non‑Prosecution Agreement on Sept. 24, 2007 with the USAO. The NPA stipulated that pending federal grand jury subpoenas would be held in abeyance unless the ag A new grand jury subp

1p

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.