Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00176105DOJ Data Set 9Other

I liqb 7 tekaLoilt iv SiOvCv/1

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00176105
Pages
4
Persons
3
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

I liqb 7 tekaLoilt iv SiOvCv/1 EFTA00176105 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP AND MANATEE) PARTNERSHIPS Jay P. Leflowitz, P.C. To Call Writer Directly: lolkoy i ntirBom VIA E-MAIL Jeffrey H. Sloman United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 99 NE 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132-2111 Dear Jeff: Citigroup Center 169 East 53rd Street Now York, New York 10022-4611 www.klrkland.com November 8, 2007 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Facsimile: I write in response to your recent letter, dated November 5, 2007. I want to make clear at the outset that Mr. Epstein is complying fully with the Non Prosecution Agreement (the "Agreement") and that he has every intention of continuing to honor its terms in good faith. Any disagreement the parties have regarding the terms of the Agreement should be resolved through open dialogue and should not be construed as a repudiation of the Agreement. I do, however, want to address each of the points you raise in your letter. First, we do not

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.
I liqb 7 tekaLoilt iv SiOvCv/1 EFTA00176105 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP AND MANATEE) PARTNERSHIPS Jay P. Leflowitz, P.C. To Call Writer Directly: lolkoy i ntirBom VIA E-MAIL Jeffrey H. Sloman United States Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida 99 NE 4th Street Miami, Florida 33132-2111 Dear Jeff: Citigroup Center 169 East 53rd Street Now York, New York 10022-4611 www.klrkland.com November 8, 2007 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Facsimile: I write in response to your recent letter, dated November 5, 2007. I want to make clear at the outset that Mr. Epstein is complying fully with the Non Prosecution Agreement (the "Agreement") and that he has every intention of continuing to honor its terms in good faith. Any disagreement the parties have regarding the terms of the Agreement should be resolved through open dialogue and should not be construed as a repudiation of the Agreement. I do, however, want to address each of the points you raise in your letter. First, we do not believe Mr. Epstein's agents are precluded from speaking to any individuals at this point in time. We carefully reviewed the Agreement and the laws governing contact with witnesses and proceeded under the belief that Mr. Epstein's agents could properly contact potential witnesses in this matter. We believe that nothing in the Agreement precludes contact by Mr. Epstein's agents with any individuals. Paragraph 7 of the Agreement states that "Epstein's counsel may contact the identified individuals through [the attorney representative]," but it in no way restricts any other contacts that are both lawful and appropriate. Furthermore, your Office has not yet identified the alleged victims under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 nor has an attorney representative been selected. Indeed, it is quite common for a party's agents, and even his attorneys, to speak with potential claimants prior to their retaining formal representation. And in this situation — where Mr. Epstein faces significant potential civil exposure, and he has a right to tesUhe veracity of t these claims — it is appropriate that his agents would seek to obtain as much information about potential-claims as possible. Nevertheless, because we want to cooperate with your Office and since you object to such communications, we will cease all contact with these individuals until the date of Mr. Epstein's plea. We request, however, that your Office provide a basis for precluding Mr. Epstein or his agents from speaking to any individuals at this time. Chicago Hong Kong London Los Angeles Munich San Francisco Washington. D.C. EFTA00176106 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Jeffrey Sloman November 8, 2007 Page 2 Second, I am a little surprised by your insistence that we request that the state court conduct the plea and sentence in November. You may recall that we previously discussed, and /xi. you agreed, that because the state judge will not stagger the plea and sentencing as we contemplated in the Agreement, Mr. Epstein could plea and be sentenced at any point before r ifillpicarci€ January 4, 2008. As you know, the judge's refusal to stagger the plea and sentencing actually r t Yip harms Mr. Epstein because this delays the timing under which he can receive the names of the cliPOshietsk individuals identified by the United States as "victims" under § 2255. But we believe we must defer to the judge's decision in this matter. To clear up any misunderstanding, however, the judge has set this case "for trial" on January 7 only as a formal matter. The judge has invited the parties to appear for the plea and sentencing on January 4, and we do not anticipate any delay beyond that date. Third, I want to clear up any confusion regarding the many inaccurate media reports about Mr. Epstein. With the hope of maintaining some semblance of privacy for Mr. Epstein, we have avoided interacting with the media regarding this matter. Indeed, the only recent comment was Howard Rubenstein's confirmation to the Palm Beach Daily News that this matter had been resolved and would not proceed to a trial. That comment was authorized only out of concern that you might read an inaccurate story and believe, mistakenly, that Mr. Epstein had decided not to proceed under the Agreement. Fourth, regarding the sentence to be imposed by the court, the Agreement, and all of the discussions we have had about it, are very clear: Mr. Epstein is to be sentenced to an 18-month term in accordance with the same rules and regulations (and the same rights and privileges) that apply to everyone in the state of Florida. That Mr. Epstein would be treated no better and no worse than anyone else was a material term of the Agreement. ur Office now believes is not entitled to equal treatment, I would very much appreciate an explanation o tie asis of such view. an Th icient y concerned about comments in your letter to seek clarification on this point, especially because the lawyers in your Office have made clear on numerous occasions to me that as long as Mr. Epstein received an 18-month sentence, your Office would not seek to interfere with the implementation of the state sentence. /1 Fifth, pursuant to the Agreement, Mr. Epstein, through his counsel, agrees to provide the a t... 544e r agreements made with the State Attorney's Office. ot, /7 e-te Finally, I must tell you that I am troubled by the manner in which your Office has dealt *14 :i with the § 2255 issues that are encompassed in the Agreement. Asyou already know, one of the , lawyers initially recommended by your Office contacted Judge to lobby for the assignment /Clan s.b of attorney representative even before Judge was formal y selected to appoint an attorney rev:A-146 k representative. Moreover, I fmd it highly unusua that your Office has continued to insist that a agi44:reot EFTA00176107 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Jeffrey Sloman November 8, 2007 Page 3 primary criteria for the appointment of the attorney representative should be the ability to take on contingency fee cases directed at Mr. Epstein. I trust you understand that I raise these concerns with you out of respect for your Office. However, despite Mr. Epstein's full intention to abide by all of the terms of the Agreement, we must reserve our right to object to certain aspects of the c.....L.7O L2255 provisions of the Agreement. Pt. uTtrtrAn tid I look forward to continuing to work with your Office to resolve any outstanding issues, caw( and I sincerely anticipate a conclusion of this matter in the very near future. Sincerely, X la . LcYkowitz sc astavec4arw 4 ,, da(;:it;dek- "-a-to O EFTA00176108

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

IN RE:

IN RE: INVESTIGATION OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN Non-Prosecution Agreement IT APPEARING that the City of Palm Beach Police Department and the State Attorney's Office for the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County (hereinafter, the "State Attorney's Office") have conducted an investigation into the conduct of Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter "Epstein"); IT APPEARING that the State Attorney's Office has charged Epstein with one count of solicitation of prostitution, in violation of Florida Statutes Section 796.07; IT APPEARING that the interest of the United States pursuant to the Petite policy will be served by the following procedure expressed in this Agreement; IT APPEARING that the United States Attorney's Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have conducted their own investigation of Epstein's background and offenses including; knowingly and willfully conspiring with others known and unknown to commit an offense against the United States, in violation of Titl

6p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: Jeffrey Epstein

From: To: Subject: Jeffrey Epstein Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 20:51:45 +0000 Importance: Normal Mr. Lefkowitz, The United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida was recently notified that the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, at your request, intends to review certain aspects of the investigation involving Mr. Epstein's sexual conduct involving minor victims. Naturally, until the DAG's Office has completed its review, this Office has postponed the current June 2, 2008 deadline requiring compliance by your client with the terms and conditions of the September 24, 2007 global resolution of state and federal liabilities, as modified by the United States Attorney's December 19, 2007 letter to Lilly Ann Sanchez, Esq. Sincerely, EFTA00214435

1p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 435 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/21/2019 Page 1 of 33

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 Motion to Compel Answers (DE 348) and Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2's Motion for Finding Waiver of Work Product and Similar Protections by Government and for Production of Documents (DE 414). The Motions are fully briefed and ripe for review. The Court has carefully considered the Motions and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. I. Background The facts, as culled from affidavits, exhibits, depositions, answers to interrogatories and reasonably inferred, for the purpose of these motions, are as follows: From betw

33p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

11/28/07 WED 09:18 FAX 1 213 680 8500

11/28/07 WED 09:18 FAX 1 213 680 8500 KIRALAND&ELLIS LLP 11002 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP AND A/MIMED PARINUSHIPS Kenneth W: Start To Call Wrier Directly. (213) 680-8440 kstarrekirklend.com VIA FACSIMILE Honorable Alice S. Fisher Assistant Attorney General Department of Justice Criminal Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Room 2107 Washington, DC 20530 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Ms. Fisher: 777 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, California 90017 (213) 680-8400 www.kirkland.com November 28, 2007 Facsimile: (213) 680-8600 I represent Jeffrey Epstein, who, as you may be aware, was the target of a dual investigation by both state and federal authorities in Florida for acts relating to his interactions with numerous young women. As you may also be aware, Mr. Epstein has entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (the "Agreement") with the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (the "USAO") to resolve its criminal investigation of him

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

EXHIBIT M

EXHIBIT M EFTA00039806 From: U Subject: Date: Fwd: Next week - meet re: Jeffrey Epstein Sunday. February 24, 2019 8:18:01 PM Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Dat • March 3 ?016 at 5:09.55 PM EST To: Subject: RE: Next week - meet re: Jeffrey Epstein Cool. Talk to you then. From: Sent: I hursday, March 03, 20th 5:05 PM To:I 2 Subject: HE: Next week - meet re: Jeffrey Epstein Tuesday at 4 is good. Thanks. From: Sent: hursday, March 03, 2011 10:24 AM To: Subject: HE: Next week - meet re: Jeffrey Epstein Sure. Sounds both intriguing and complicated. I uesday is better for me than Wednesday. How's Tuesday at 4 pm? From: Sent: I hursday. March 03, 201b k:08 AM To: ■ Subject: Next week - meet re: Jeffrey Epstein Earlier this week Pete Skinner and two other lawyers came in to pitch a sex trafficking case against Jeffrey Epstein, a financier with homes abroad, in FL, and in Manhattan. They represent vho claims to have been prostituted by and f

3p
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

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.