Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-02610779DOJ Data Set 11Other

EFTA02610779

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 11
Reference
efta-02610779
Pages
3
Persons
0
Integrity

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: 1 <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2018 8:14 PM To: Ken Starr Subject: Re: My edited version i think you and alan. . On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 2:52 PM Ken Starr < wrote: > =gt; The edits look good. Basic question: should this =e a piece authored by the entire team, or a more personal presentation by =wo or so members of the team? I drafted it in a persona= way. I like that approach. Thoughts= Sent fr=m my iPhone On Dec 16, 2018, at 12:20 PM,1 <[email protected]>= wrote: =A0with edits. - pretty good i think thoughts. <=r> Forwarded message From: Kathy Ruemml=r < Date: Sun, Dec 16,=2018 at 12:04 PM Subject: Fwd: My edited version To: J <[email protected]</=» =br> <mailto Begin forwarded message: From: Kathy Ruemmler < Subject: <=>My edited version Date: December 16, 2018 at 11:49:57=AM EST <mailto > > > > EFTA_R1_01805793 EFTA02610779 To: J <jeevacation@gmailcom <mailto:jeevacation@gmailcom» "Sweetheart deal!" =o goes the attack on the resolution of a long-ago federal investigation in=olving our former client -- and now-friend -- Jeffrey Epstein. The a=tack is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law or the facts, n=r by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, =effrey was subjected to an aggressive federal intrusion into what would ty=ically be considered a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Flo=ida. His offense — at its core, sexual favors for =ire — has long been treated as a matter entrusted to law= of the several States, not the federal government. His conduct =AO— while clearly unlawful and for which he has accepted full=C2 responsibility — was a classic state offense and was bei=g treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach Count=. Nevertheless, far from going "soft" on the =A0matter and without invitation from the state, the federal government int=rvened. Ironically, now many for their own opportunistic reasons are=criticizing the federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secreta=y of Labor Alex Acosta (then the United States Attorney in south Florida),=for not going far enough. The critics are wrong on the facts and the =aw. <=ont size="4">Here are the true key facts: Jeffrey Epstein, a succe=sful self- made businessman with no prior criminal history whatsoever, enga=ed in illegal conduct that amounts to solicitation of prostitution. =is conduct was wrong and a violation of Florida state law. Although =o coercion, violence, alcohol, drugs or the like were involved, some of th= women he paid were under the age of 18. Those facts were carefully assessed by experienced state prosecut=rs who aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a bli=d eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, th= Palm Beach State Attorney's Office conducted an extensive 15-month in=estigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein=was then indicted by a state grand jury on a single felony count of soliciration of prostitution. During that intense investigation, the =tate prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted vict=ms, considered their credibility -- or lack thereof -- and considered the =xtent of exculpatory evidence. After months of negotiations, the sta=e prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matte= that vindicated the public interest -- a resolution entirely consistent w=th that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. The =ystem worked as it should. Then, in came the feds. The U=ited States Attorney's Office extensively and aggressively investigate= whether Mr. Epstein had engaged in a commercial human trafficking ring, t=rgeting minors. But that's not what this was, and the f=deral authorities ultimately acknowledged that, deferring prosecution to t=e state. But not without conditions. The federal prosecutors i=sisted on many unorthodox requirements that Mr. Epstein's experien=ed defense team had never seen imposed on any defendant anywhere. </=ont>Under the federally- forced deal, Jeffrey was =A0required to request that the state prosecutors demand the imposition of = jail sentence and lifetime sex-offender registration, which would no= have otherwise been required under the previously agreed-upon state dispo=ition of this prostitution charge. Jeffrey accepted full r=sponsibility for his conduct, complied with the feds' demands= served his sentence, and in the process was treated exactly the same as o=her state-incarcerated individuals. His conduct while in custody was=exemplary, and so characterized by the state custodial authorities. =/font> Our friend Jeffrey Epstein has paid his debt to society. He ha= also paid out millions of dollars to the asserted victims and their lawye=s. For over ten years, he has lived a good and law-abiding life, 2 EFTA_R1_01805794 EFTA02610780 inc=uding carrying on his wide-ranging philanthropies. Those of us who represe=ted him in the Florida proceedings -- for customary professional fees -- n=w count him as a trusted friend. Our nation faces vitally important challeng=s, many involving the treatment of women and basic human dignity. Vo=ces are rightly being raised speaking truth to power, especially about wom=n in the workplace. But Jeffrey, an exemplary employer, has long sin=e been called to account by the criminal justice system for his misdeeds o= yesteryear. In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second =hances, that unhappy chapter in Jeffrey's otherwise-magnificent life s=ould be allowed to close once and for all. please note The inf=rmation contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorne=-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended =nly for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unaut=orized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part the=eof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received th=s communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-m=il or by e-mail to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , and destroy this communication and all conies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reservedar> =br> =AO please note The information conta=ned in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privi=eged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for th= use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, d=sclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strict=y prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communic=tion in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-ma=l to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , and destroy this communication and all copies thereotar>including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved --000000000000038b96057d294e53-- conversation-id 318523 date-last-viewed 0 date-received 1544991238 flags 8590195713 remote-id 882610 3 EFTA_R1_01805795 EFTA02610781

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02611118

2p
Dept. of JusticeFeb 21, 2019

Read the judge's ruling

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 435 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/21/2019 Page 1 of 33 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. _____________________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the Court upon Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (DE 361); the United States’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 408); Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2's

33p
DOJ Data Set 7CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00009116

0p
Dept. of JusticeFeb 21, 2019

Epstein

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 435 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/21/2019 Page 1 of 33 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. _____________________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the Court upon Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (DE 361); the United States’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 408); Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2's

33p
OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA S 120 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x THE GOVERNMENT'S OMNIBUS MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO THE DEFENDANT'S PRE-TRIAL MOTIONS AUDREY STRAUSS United States Attorney Southern District of New York Attorney for the United States of America Assistant United States Attorneys - Of Counsel - EFTA00039421 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1 BACKGROUND 2 ARGUMENT 3 I. Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement Is Irrelevant to This Case 3 A. The NPA Does Not Bind the Southern District of New York 4 1. The Text of the Agreement Does Not Contain a Promise to Bind Other Districts 5 2. The Defendant Has Offered No Evidence That the NPA Binds Other Districts 9 B. The NPA Does Not Immunize Maxwell from Prosecution 15 1. The NPA Is Limited to Particular Crimes Between 2001 and 2007 15 2. The NPA Does Not Confer Enforceable Rights on Maxwell 17 C. The Defendant

239p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Internal email chain discussing Jeffrey Epstein's 2018 plea deal, federal‑state jurisdiction clash, and potential political leverage involving Alex...

The passage reveals a private strategy discussion about framing Epstein’s case to implicate high‑level officials (Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta, former U.S. Attorney, and former special counsel Ken S Email mentions Alex Acosta (then U.S. Attorney, later Secretary of Labor) as a target for political Ken Starr is referenced as a source of commentary on the deal, indicating possible coordination wi

3p

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.