From: "Jeffrey E." <[email protected]>

From: "Jeffrey E." <[email protected]> To: "Martin G. Weinberg" Subject: Re: ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 16:58:46 +0000 i think thats in his interest not mine On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Martin G. Weinberg <=1.1e wrote: I like points 2,3 below but worry that too early a warning will simply result in their papering Patterson's participation thus blunting any concern for how they exploit Patterson's name. The points, however, feel strong and I would want to know more about timing from an insider. I do not think it in your legal interest to go on TV i.e. go strongly public for a variety of reasons and I do not understand how taking an anti-Trump position would help your legal or media life. From: jeffrfl Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 11:41 AM To: Martin Weinberg ; Kathy Ruemmler ; Darren Indyke Subject: Fwd: Patterson Forwarded message From: Michael Wolff < Date: Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:39 AM Subject: Patterson To: Jeffrey Epstein leevacation@gntom> A few things to think about: If the Patterson book is being published in August, that presents some time frame issues. You would not be able to do a competing book or documentary before then. This is not to say that they shouldn't be pursued. In a sense, better that they know what Patterson's position is and, a year from now say, be able to counter it. I have some thoughts on book and doc to share at your convenience. That being said, you do need an immediate counter narrative to the book. I believe Trump offers an ideal opportunity. It's a chance to make the story about something other than you, while, at the same time, letting you frame your own story. Also, becoming an anti- Trump voice gives you a certain political cover which you decidedly don't have now. Still, this necessary involves you going public. And so the most basic decision is about your willingness to do that. My view is that in a couple of weeks you could master message and technical proficiency. I know a bunch of people who could be very helpful here. This would involve something along the lines of you writing an op-ed, doing a high profile television interview (Charlie Rose, I'd say), and perhaps some social media efforts. Speaking of which, again, I think a strategic plan, involving your public identity, philanthropic activities and interests, and the development of media allies, ought finally to be put in place. A big, comprehensive, expensive effort. The alternative is to continue to keep head down and hope Patterson book is just more he-said she-said and Connolly getting lost in the reeds (which, as an inveterate conspiracist, he always does). My worry is that Patterson can be counted on to produce a bestseller, and while he isn't regarded as a serious writer, he'll surely be unloading a lot of tabloid copy. Because this will be tied to the election, the Trump-Clinton angle will amp up the attention 10-fold, in fact, possibly, a hundred fold. Possibly more than anything you've encountered before. Meanwhile— In a lawyer's letter, I'd suggest including the following points--not necessarily legal, but a warning about how a press campaign might unfold (publishers are more worried about being caught in negative media controversy than they are of legal threats): 1) Little, Brown has made on the record representations to at least one well-known journalist that it was not publishing a book by James Patterson about Jeffrey Epstein--possibly an effort to avoid inquiries about the questionable nature of the book; EFTA00831397 2) The actual author of the book, John Connolly, is someone other than the stated author, James Patterson. Connolly is known to have developed an obsession with Epstein, such that, his longtime employer, Vanity Fair, has refused to allow him to write about Epstein for the magazine; 3) Sources have confirmed for us that Patterson has had little more than a minimal consulting role in the book, and that Connolly has functioned in every material way as the book's researcher and writer. We believe Patterson's "authorship" of the book will not stand up to scrutiny. And, indeed, that the entire notion of an extension of the Patterson franchise into nonfiction, as it has been used in fiction and children's book--effectively other authors writing under the Patterson name—presents a host of journalism ethical issues. please note 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 JEE 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 [email protected], and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved please note 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 JEE 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 [email protected], and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved EFTA00831398