Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00067449DOJ Data Set 9Other

(USAFLS)"

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00067449
Pages
3
Persons
2
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

From: (USAFLS)" To: Brendan White < Bee: ' (USAFLS)" Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 22:40:41 +0000 I mportatice: Normal Dear Mr. White: I have not received any such confirmation. At this time, we are still on for July 15t. I recommend that you make your travel plans for Monday afternoon or evening and if things change, I will call you right away. Thank you. Assistant U.S. Attorney West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone F From: Brendan White [mailto: Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:00 PM To: . (USAFLS) Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance I've learned from Mr. Epstein's attorney that the plea is scheduled to take place on Monday morning. In understand, of course, that you need confirmation of this before withdrawing the subpoena, but it might make logistical sense to consider putting the contingent appearance off for another week at this point, to avoid our having to make an unnecessary trip to Florida. Although I am confident that things will

Persons Referenced (2)

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009
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.
From: (USAFLS)" To: Brendan White < Bee: ' (USAFLS)" Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 22:40:41 +0000 I mportatice: Normal Dear Mr. White: I have not received any such confirmation. At this time, we are still on for July 15t. I recommend that you make your travel plans for Monday afternoon or evening and if things change, I will call you right away. Thank you. Assistant U.S. Attorney West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone F From: Brendan White [mailto: Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 3:00 PM To: . (USAFLS) Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance I've learned from Mr. Epstein's attorney that the plea is scheduled to take place on Monday morning. In understand, of course, that you need confirmation of this before withdrawing the subpoena, but it might make logistical sense to consider putting the contingent appearance off for another week at this point, to avoid our having to make an unnecessary trip to Florida. Although I am confident that things will proceed as scheduled, should there be a problem, we would then be able to appear at a later date. Brendan White — Original Message --- From: To: Brendan White Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:55 AM Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance _(USAFLS) Dear Mr. White: If Mr. Epstein enters a guilty plea in accordance with that agreement on Monday, then the subpoena will be withdrawn. At this point, I have not received confirmation that the change of plea is going to occur, nor have I received information confirming that the lea will be in conformance with our agreement. As such, at this time, I still intend to present Ms. testimony to the grand jury on Tuesday. With respect to the immunity question, I refer you to my e-mail of June 20, which is shown below. I f the situation changes, I will contact you. Thank you. EFTA00067449 Assistant U.S. Attorney West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone Fax From: Brendan White [mallto Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:38 AM To: . (USAFLS) Subject: Re: Grand Jury Appearance Dear Ms. I understand that there has been a recent development with respect to Mr. Epstein in that he intends to plead guilty in Florida state court on Monday pursuant to a deferred prosecution with your office that has already been executed. Since this would seem to obviate any need for Ms. to testify, please let me know what is going on with respect to this Tuesday. Do we still need to come down there and, if so, will she receive court-ordered immunity? Thanks. Brendan White --- Original Message -- From: To: Brendan White Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:09 PM Subject: RE: Grand Jury Appearance _(USAFLS) Dear Mr. White: Please feel free to make your own travel arrangements, but if you would like Ms. travel costs to be reimbursed, they must be made through the government's approved agency on the approved carriers. Regarding the immunity, at this point, without a written proffer from you regarding the substance of her anticipated testimony, I believe that the more prudent course will be to question Ms. to determine the limits of her Fifth Amendment exposure and, if necessary, to apply to the Court at that time. If you provide me with a written proffer that summarizes her anticipated testimony and explains how she will be exposed to criminal liability, then I can make the motion ahead of time. Your written statement would be treated as an attorney statement made in the course of confidential plea discussions and related negotiations, and would be governed by Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(0 and Fed. R. Evid. 410. Assistant U.S. Attorney West Palm Beach. FL 33401 Phone Fax From: Brendan White [mallto: Sent: Monde June 23 2008 1:45 PM To: .(USAFLS) Cc: (USAFLS) Subject Re: Grand Jury Appearance We will be there, and I will make the travel arrangements. I am assuming that this will be done in connection with an order of immunity. Please let me know if that is correct so I can advise Ms. Thanks. Brendan White EFTA00067450 Original Message From: To: Brendan White Cc: I l_(USAFLS) Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:27AM Subject: Grand Jury Appearance JUSAFLS) Dear Mr. White: will need to grand jury on July ist to give testimony. Please contact my at 't. 3037, to make travel arrangements. I expect that Ms. testimony will begin either in the late morning or early afternoon, but she should be available for the whole day. Thank you. Assistant U.S. Attorney West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone Fax EFTA00067451

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 0372112011 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 v. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR ORDER DIRECTING THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NOT TO WITHHOLD RELEVANT EVIDENCE COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to move for an order from this Court directing the U.S. Attorney's Office not to suppress material evidence relevant to this case. The Court should enter an order, as it would in other criminal or civil cases, requiring the Government to make appropriate production of such evidence to the victims. BACKGROUND In discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office about this case, counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 inquired about whether the Office would voluntarily provide to the victims information in its possession that was mater

15p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 I UNITED STATES DECLARATION OF BRADLEY J. EDWARDS, ESQ. I. I, Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. Along with co-counsel, I have represented Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 in civil suits against Jeffrey Epstein for sexually abusing them. I have also represented other girls who were sexually abused by Epstein. As a result of that representation, I have become familiar with many aspects of the criminal investigation against Epstein and have reviewed discovery and correspondence connected with the criminal investigation. I have also spoken to Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 at length about the criminal investigation and their involvement in it, as well enforcement (or lack their of) of their rights as crime victims in the investigation. I also represent Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 in the pen

12p
House OversightUnknown

Federal prosecutors allegedly back‑down on Epstein victim notifications after pressure from Epstein’s lawyers, with DOJ officials’ communications revealing internal conflict

Federal prosecutors allegedly back‑down on Epstein victim notifications after pressure from Epstein’s lawyers, with DOJ officials’ communications revealing internal conflict The passage provides concrete names (Jeffrey Sloman, Acosta, Lefkowitz, Starr) and dates (2008, 2013) showing possible obstruction of victim notifications in the Epstein case, suggesting a lead for investigating DOJ and FBI decision‑making. While it ties high‑level officials, the claim of pressure from Epstein’s attorneys is not yet corroborated, limiting the score to the high‑mid range. Key insights: Jeffrey Sloman, top aide to U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, planned to notify Epstein victims after a plea deal was signed.; Lefkowitz warned Acosta that the office had promised not to contact victims or potential claimants.; Federal prosecutors resumed the FBI investigation and interviewed witnesses in NY and NM while plea negotiations continued.

1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 013-80736-Civ-Marra/Nlatthewman JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2, Petitioners, vs. UNITED STATES, Respondent. DECLARATION OF IN SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE AND OPPOSITION TO PETITIONERS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT do hereby declare that I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of Florida. I also am admitted to practice in all courts of the states of Minnesota and Florida, the Eighth, Eleventh, and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of Florida, the District of Minnesota, and the Northern District of California. My bar admission status in California and Minnesota is currently inactive. I am currently employed as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida and was so employed during all of the events described herein. 2. I am the Assistant United States Attorne

5p
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00014046

0p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Attorney Edwards alleges U.S. Attorney's Office withheld evidence from Epstein abuse victims' counsel

The passage provides a concrete claim that federal prosecutors deliberately refused to share evidence collected in the Epstein search warrant with victim attorneys, suggesting possible obstruction or Edwards represented multiple alleged Epstein victims in mid‑2008. He contacted AUSA Villafafia, who indicated a possible indictment despite a purported plea deal. The U.S. Attorney’s Office refused t

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.