Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-23874House OversightOther

House Oversight Document Claims Prosecutorial Irregularities in Jeffrey Epstein Deferred Prosecution Agreement

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #010727
Pages
1
Persons
2
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage alleges that federal prosecutors mishandled evidence and entered a questionable deferred prosecution agreement in the Jeffrey Epstein case, naming a former law partner of a prosecutor and Testimony cited claims no interstate communications meeting §2422(b) occurred. Women allegedly lied about ages to gain entry, contradicting prosecution narratives. Accusations of irregularities and u

This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.

View Source Collection

Tags

jeffrey-epsteinfederal-prosecutorssex-traffickingprosecutorial-misconductlegal-misconductdeferred-prosecutionlegal-exposuremoderate-importancehouse-oversightsexual-misconduct
Ask AI about this document

Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Honorable Mark Filip May 19, 2008 Page 5 In fact, recent testimony of several alleged “victims” contradicts claims made by federal prosecutors during the negotiations of a deferred prosecution agreement. The consistent representations of key Government witnesses (such as [, EE. TE 2nd ER) confirm the following critical points: First, there was no communication, telephonic or otherwise, that meets the requirements of § 2422(b). For instance, Ms. Gonzalez confirmed that Mr. Epstein never emailed, text-messaged, or used any facility of interstate commerce whatsoever, before or after her one (and only) visit to his home. [REE Tr. (deposition) at 30. Second, the women who testified admitted that they lied to Mr. Epstein about their age in order to gain admittance into his home. Indeed, the women who brought their underage friends to Mr. Epstein testified that they would counsel their friends to lie about their ages as well. MEME stated the following: “I would tell my girlfriends just like [I approached me. Make sure you tell him you’re 18. Well, these girls that I brought, I know that they were 18 or 19 or 20. And the girls that I didn’t know and I don’t know if they were lying or not, I would say make sure that you tell him you’re 18.” Po Third, there was no routine or habit of improper communication expressing an intent to transform a massage into an illegal sexual act. In fact, there was often no sexual activity at all during the massage. I rs testified that “[s]ometimes [Mr. Epstein] just wanted his feet massaged. Sometimes he just wanted a back massage.” i [ also stated that Mr. Epstein. “never touched [her] physically” and that all she did was “massage[ ] his back, his chest and his thighs and that was it.” a Finally, there was no force, coercion, fraud, violence, drugs, or even alcohol present in connection with Mr. Epstein’s encounters with these women. (EE stated that “[Mr. Epstein] never tried to force me to do anything.” iii MMM.t 12. These accounts are far from the usual testimony in sex slavery, Internet stings and sex tourism cases previously brought. The women in actuality were not younger than 16, which is the age of consent in most of the 50 states, and the sex activity was irregular and in large part, consisted of solo self-pleasuring. The recent crop of civil suits brought against Mr. Epstein confirm that the plaintiffs did not discuss any sexually-related activities with anyone prior to arriving at Mr. Epstein’s residence. This reinforces our contention that no telephonic or Internet persuasion, inducement, enticement or coercion of a minor, or of any other individual, occurred. In addition, Mr. Jeffrey Herman, the former law partner of one of the federal prosecutors involved in this matter and the attorney for most of the civil complainants (as described in detail below), was quoted in the Palm Beach Post as saying that “it doesn’t matter” that his clients lied about their ages and told Mr. Epstein that they were 18 or 19. Not only is a federal prosecution of this matter unwarranted, but the irregularity of conduct by prosecutors and the unorthodox terms of the deferred prosecution agreement are beyond any reasonable interpretation of the scope of a prosecutor’s responsibilities. The list of improprieties includes, but is not limited to, the following facts:

Related Documents (6)

OtherUnknown

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP

KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP AND AFFILIATED PARTNERSHIPS Kenneth W. Starr To Call Writer Directl : 777 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, California 90017 www.kirkland.com June 19, 2008 Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Office of the Deputy Attorney General United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Room 4115 Washington, D.C. 20530 Dear Facsimilo: Dir. Fax: I again want to thank you for this opportunity to explain why we believe that a federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein is unwarranted. I appreciate your having informed us that you already have our May 19 and May 27 communications to the Deputy Attorney General, as well as our prior written submissions to CEOS and to the Southern District of Florida. In light of the significant volume of our prior submissions and to facilitate your review, we have drafted four supplemental submissions that will provide a roadmap for your investigation of this matter. Given the bulk of these documents a

5p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Internal Justice Department memo flags potential selective federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein

The passage reveals an internal review (CEOS) that was requested by an unnamed Mr. Acosta and discusses the Justice Department’s consideration of prosecutorial discretion in the Epstein case. It sugge CEOS conducted a limited review at the request of Mr. Acosta regarding federal prosecution of Jeffre The review concluded only that prosecution was not categorically barred, delegating the decision b

1p
OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-CI V-Marra/Matthewman JANE DOE # I and JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS' FIRST REOUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO THE GOVERNMENT The United States (hereinafter the "government") hereby responds to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's First Request for Admissions to the Government Regarding Questions Relevant to Their Pending Action Concerning the Crime Victims Rights Act (hereinafter the "Request for Admissions"), and states as follows:' I. The government admits that the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida ("USAO") conducted an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") and developed evidence and information in contemplation of a potential federal prosecution against Epstein for many federal sex offenses. Except as otherwise admitted above, the government denies Request No. I. The government's res

65p
DOJ Data Set 10CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01965864

0p
OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 216 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/2013 Page 1 of 2

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 216 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/2013 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Matthewman JANE DOES #1 AND #2, Petitioners, I UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' NOTICE OF FILING SUPPLEMENTAL PRIVILEGE LOG Pursuant to the Court's June 18, 2013 Omnibus Order (DE 190), the Respondent, United States of America, by and through the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, hereby gives notice of its filing of its Privilege Log, which is attached hereto. The documents referenced in the Privilege Log are being delivered today to the Chambers of U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra for ex pane in camera review, pursuant to the Court's Omnibus Order. Respectfully submitted, WIFREDO A. FERRER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: I I I I a EFTA00209306 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 216 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/2013 Page 2 of 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIF

16p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Letter from Epstein's lawyers to Deputy Attorney General requesting DOJ review of Miami U.S. Attorney's push for federal prosecution

The passage reveals an attempt by high‑profile lawyers (Kenneth Starr, former independent counsel) to intervene in a federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, citing political connections to former Pres Lawyers Kenneth Starr and Joe Whitley petitioned Deputy AG Mark Filip to review the Miami U.S. Attor The letter claims the Miami office set an arbitrary June 2 deadline to force compliance with a mod

1p

Forum Discussions

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

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.