Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00627617DOJ Data Set 9Other

From: Jeevacation

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
efta-efta00627617
Pages
3
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Jeevacation To: Martin Weinberg Subject: Fwd: Fw: Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 21:25:46 +0000 Attachments: Epstein_Complaint_-_Filed.pdf Who sent this to the reporter? Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Jay Leflcowite Date: May 18, 2010 5:13:36 PM EDT To: "Jeffrey Epstein" Subject: Fw: Fyi. Pls advise. From: "Smith, Stephanie" Sent: 05/18/2010 05:11 PM AST To: Jay Lefkowitz Hi Jay, Stephanie Smith from Page Six at the New York Post. I have a copy of a complaint filed here by Podhurst Orseck, the law firm that represented 16 victims in the Jeffrey Epstein case. The complaing claims that Epstein owes them $2 million in fees and is in breach of his non-prosection agreeement, where he agreed to pay the victims' legal fees. Wanted to see if you or Epstein had a response to this complaint. I am covering this for the Page Six column in the post tomorrow. I do have a 6 pm deadline. Please let me know if you're the correct lawyer that I should reach out to . Best, Stephanie Stephanie Smith The New York Post Page Six 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 212.930.8618 office 917.482.8178 cell Two years after pleading guilty for running an illicit pleasure den where he sexually assaulted hundreds of underage girls, Palm Beach billionaire Jeff Epstein is now stiffing his victims vet again by refusing to pay their legal fees, which he is required to pay under the Non Prosecution Agreement he inked with the US Atty's office back in 2008. According to a complaint filed in Federal court today, this development could open the doors to a Federal prosecution. As past news articles reveal, Epstein had a predilection for young teenage girls (most ages 14-16) who he would force into sexual acts. In 2009, Epstein entered into what many saw as a "sweetheart deal," with federal EFTA00627617 prosecutors waiving prosecution in exchange for a guilty plea at the state level and reducing what would have been a 10 yr minimum jail sentence to only 18 months (he served 13). Under the agreement, Epstein beared responsibility for paying his victims' legal fees in the civil suits filed against him. Florida attorney Bob Josefsberg, a partner at Miami-based Podhurst Orseck, was appointed by the US Atty's office to represent 12 victims. But while Epstein bankrolled an army of high-priced defense lawyers — Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr among them — he has yet to pay the more than $2 million in fees billed by his victims' lawyers. Epstein's unwillingness to pay comes as the same time as he refuses to divulge any information about his net worth, despite a court order, other than to say its upwards of $50 million. Many believe his net worth to be in the billions. Today's lawsuit, filed in Miami federal court by Steve Marks and Peter Prieto of Podhurst Orseck claims that "it has become abundantly clear that Epstein, having obtained the benefits of the NPA and escaped federal criminal prosecution, now believes that he can simply ignore — without consequence — the obligations imposed. Put simply, Epstein believes he is above the law." Jeff Epstein's failure to pay these bills puts him in material violation of his Non Prosecution Agreement and could give way to the federal prosecution of him and his accomplices (the women who would lure the young girls to his place). Let me know if interested and I'll send you a copy of the complaint. I can also line up interviews to speak with the attorneys who filed suit. ******WWW***********************************************WWW The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of Kirkland & Ellis LLP or Kirkland & Ellis International LLP. Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. ******WWW*****************WWW**WWW*****************WWW**WW* This message and its attachments may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient (or responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient), you are hereby notified that you have received this transmission in error; any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by reply or by telephone (call us at 212-930-8000) and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any content of this message and its attachments that does not relate to the official business of NYP Holdings, Inc. must be taken not to have been sent or endorsed by any of them. No warranty is made that the e-mail or attachment(s) are free from computer viruses or other defects. EFTA00627618 EFTA00627619

Technical Artifacts (3)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Phone212-930-8000
Phone212.930.8618
Phone917.482.8178

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 9:08-ev-80736-Civ-ICAM JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2 I UNITED STATES JANE DOE 1 AND JANE DOE 2'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO EPSTEIN'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER COME NOW Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to file this response in opposition to Epstein's Motion for a Protective Confidentiality Order (DE 247). Epstein's motion is a thinly-disguised attempt to relitigate issues already covered by the court's earlier ruling eleven months ago (DE 188), which allowed the victims to file correspondence relating to Epstein's non-prosecution agreement in the public court file. Rather than reverse its previous ruling, this Court should reaffirm it — and allow the important issues presented by this case to be litigated in the light of day. BACKGROUND Because of Epstein's penchant for relitigating issues that have already been decided, it

20p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs I UNITED STATES, Defendants JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO THE GOVERNMENT REGARDING INFORMATION RELEVANT TO THEIR PENDING ACTION CONCERN THE CRIME VICTIMS RIGHTS ACT COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 ("the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, and request the defendant United States (hereinafter "the Government") to produce the original or best copy of the items listed herein below for inspection and/or copying, pursuant to the Court's Order (DE #99) directing discovery in this case. BACKGROUND As the Government will recall, the victims have asked the Government to stipulate to undisputed facts in this case. The Government has declined. Accordingly, the victims filed their Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act and Request for a Hearing on Appropriate Remedies (DE 48

13p
Court UnsealedJan 26, 2015

Dershowitz Supplement to Motion for Limited Intervention

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 285 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/12/2015 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOES #2 Plaintiffs, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. ________________________________/ ALAN DERSHOWITZ’S SUPPLEMENT TO HIS MOTION FOR LIMITED INTERVENTION (DE 282) Alan M. Dershowitz, a nonparty to this litigation, respectfully supplements his previously filed Motion for Limited Intervention (

6p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Subject: RE: Activity in Case 9:08-cv-80736-ICAM Doe v. United States of America Endorsed Order

From: To: Subject: RE: Activity in Case 9:08-cv-80736-ICAM Doe v. United States of America Endorsed Order Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 15:38:56 +0000 Importance: Normal I should be available on April 20, and I think also on April 28, but I'm checking on the later date. That could be when I need to be in Nashville. I should be able to tell you before Monday. U From: Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 12:52 PM To: Subj : : vi in se : -cv- - oe v. ni o menca n o er Hello again — Please see below. I will set up a conference line and send an email to the judge and all attorneys of record. By the way, I called to clarify whether "all counsel of record" meant only counsel for the Jane Does and us, and I was told that the judge wants all intervenors notified, as well. That means: Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, Jay Lefkowitz, Jeffrey Epstein, Palm Beach Post, and Palm Beach Daily News. Judge Marra denied Bruce Reinhart and Alan Dershowitz's motions to intervene. Assistant U.S. Attor

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

U.S. Department of Justice

U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida 500 South Australian Ave., Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 (561) 820-8711 Facsimile: (561) 820-8777 April 22, 2008 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS la, Counsel Office of Professional Responsibility U.S. Department of Justice Washington, DC 20530-0001 Re: Self-Report of Allegation of Conflict of Interest Dear Mr. I write to advise you that I have learned that lawyers for a target of one of my investigations, Jeffrey Epstein, have raised ethical concerns regarding my involvement in his potential prosecution in the Southern District of Florida. Specifically, I understand that Epstein's attorneys have notified Assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher and/or her staff that I have an actual conflict of interest. As part of pre-indictment plea negotiations, the parties agreed that Epstein's victims would be allowed to collect civil damages from Epstein and that Epstein would provide counsel for the vict

7p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs I UNITED STATES, Defendants JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO THE GOVERNMENT REGARDING INFORMATION RELEVANT TO THEIR PENDING ACTION CONCERN THE CRIME VICTIMS RIGHTS ACT COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 ("the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, and request the defendant United States (hereinafter "the Government") to produce the original or best copy of the items listed herein below for inspection and/or copying, pursuant to the Court's Order (DE #99) directing discovery in this case. BACKGROUND As the Government will recall, the victims have asked the Government to stipulate to undisputed facts in this case. The Government has declined. Accordingly, the victims filed their Motion for Finding of Violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act and Request for a Hearing on Appropriate Remedies (DE 48

13p

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.