Subject: FW: Vanity Fair magazine

From: To: Cc: Subject: FW: Vanity Fair magazine Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 19:47:26 +0000 Importance: Normal FYI - USAO response to Vanity Fair questions. From Se 11 3:46 PM To: Cc: Subject: Vanity Fair magazine Hi John. Hope all is well with you. Below, please find [in red ink] the USAO responses to your questions. s e Ho this helps. Take care, From• Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 1:51 PM To: Subject: From: John Connolly Vanity Fair magazine Please confirm receipt. AUSA It was a pleasure speaking with you this morning. As per your request here are questions I would like to have answered for a piece I am researching on Jeffrey Epstein. As life would have it I am going to be on a busman's holiday this coming week on Singer Island, FL. I would like to meet you and whomever else you think I should speak with. If not, I understand perfectly. Let me preface these questions by saying that AUS.ei who was in charge of the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein has a remarkably record as a prosecutor. I also know that an AUSA does not have the authority to grant a potential defendant a non -prosecution agreement without the permission of higher ups in the Justice Department. Not quite three years ago, the US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, granted Jeffrey Epstein a non- prosecution agreement in return for his accepting a FL State plea deal for his illegal acts regarding sex with minor females. The state case was handled by the West Palm Beach State Prosecutor who has since left office. Re terms and conditions of imprisonment: --Was your office aware of the extraordinary sweet deal that Mr. Epstein was granted by that state prosecutor? --Was your office at the time of the agreement aware that Mr. Epstein would not be sent to a state prison facility as almost all defendants who are sentenced to more that a year in prison are required to do? --Was your office aware that Mr. Epstein would serve his sentence in the local WPB jail? EFTA00214025 --Was your office aware that Mr. Epstein would be allowed, what most FL law enforcement officials describe as "beyond a sweetheart deal", in that six days a week at 7:00 AM Mr. Epstein would leave the the WPB jail with a corrections officer he was personally paying for, and be escorted to the office of attorney Jack Goldberger where he would be allowed to stay until 11:00 PM and then be returned to jail for the evening? Ostensibly this was so that Mr. Epstein could work on a new charity he had formed. This despite the fact that just prior to beginning his jail sentence, Mr. Epstein liquidated his charity and gave $18 million to a charity run by the wife of his former patron. --Does the US Attorney believe that Mr. Epstein was working on a charity? --Was Mr. Epstein doing work as a Confidential Informer for the federal government as he has in the past? Mr. Eptein was Victim # 1 in the federal indictment of two Bear Stears executives on fraud charges stemming from a mortgage backed fund that went under. Mr. Epstein lost almost $70 million in that fund. --Was Mr. Epstein working on the government case while working on "His Charity"? --Has your office ever agreed to any allow any other prisoner the same or similar sweet deal? --Was your office aware that in return for Mr. Goldberger's help, Mr. Epstein purchased for him a top of the line black BMW? (Sadly for Goldberger he was in an accident and totaled the vehicle three weeks later.) The USAO reached a NPA with Mr. Epstein in good faith. The Agreement speaks for itself about the expectations of the USAO regarding the length and conditions of punishment. Ultimately, the sentence was imposed by the State Court Judge who presided over the matter. At this time, we cannot comment further on your questions regarding any possible cooperation by Mr. Epstein, or what the USAO might have known or not known at the time of the negotiations. Re Alex Acosta alleged Conflict/Recusal Issue: It has come to my attention that the R. Alexander Acosta former Attorney General for the Southern District of Florida during the investigation and non-prosecution agreement with Mr. Epstein had been a law partner and friend of two Mr. Epstein's lawyers. Both Ken Star and Jay Lefkowitz had been partners with Mr. Acosta at the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis prior to his being appointed by President Bush. I have been told by sources that Mr. Acosta was the person responsible for the decision not to prosecute Mr. Epstein. I have also been told that during Mr. Starr's trip to FL to speak with federal prosecutors he complained to Mr. Acosta that the press coverage of his trips to FL on Mr. Epstein's private jets were being leaked by FBI agents. ( I can assure you that was not true.) --Did Mr. Acosta recuse himself from any discussions about the Epstein case so as to avoid even the appearance of impropriety? --Was the possibility of his removing himself from the case ever discussed by officials in the Justice Department? --Are there any memos regarding that? --Is there currently an Office of Professional Responsibility investigation into the facts surrounding the handling of this case and Mr. Acosta actions in it? DOJ policy and the Privacy Act prohibit comment on the existence or non-existence of OPR investigations. However, please note that, at the request of the defense, the office of the deputy attorney general reviewed the U.S. Attorney's handling of this matter, including allegations of misconduct, and determined there was no basis to intervene in the matter. We will not be making additional comments. Thanks for checking with us. EFTA00214026 Thanks so much for your help, John Connolly EFTA00214027