From: Martin Weinberg <MINIM>

From: Martin Weinberg <MINIM> To: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> Subject: Fw: Re: letter to editor Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 17:21:02 +0000 Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. 20 Park Plaza Suite 1000 This Electronic Message contains information from the Law Office of Martin G. Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, please note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. --- On Mon, 3/4/19, Mermelstein, Sue < Ina> wrote: > From: Mermelstein, Sue > Subject: Re: letter to editor > To: "Martin Weinberg" <MINIM> > Date: Monday, March 4, 2019, 11:59 AM > Thanks Martin. > We'd rather not link to an > unedited version of the letter, but as I wrote earlier if > there's something you really wanted to include, we'd > be open to a slightly longer version for the > web.Sue > On Mon, Mar 4, > 2019 at 11:52 AM Martin Weinberg <Ma- > wrote: > Thank you. Will be > back to you shortly with both the citation you requested and > some proposed changes knowing we are at a word limit. > Question - is there anyway for the NYT to include a link to > the full letter in its intemet version, thanks. > Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. > 20 Park Plaza > Suite 1000 > Boston, MA 02116 EFTA01031657 This Electronic Message > contains information from the Law Office of Martin G. > Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information is > intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not > the addressee, please note that any disclosure, copying, > distribution, or use of the contents of this message is > prohibited. > On Mon, 3/4/19, Mennelstein, Sue aa > wrote: > Subject: Re: letter to editor > To: "Martin Weinberg" > Date: Monday, March 4, 2019, 11:38 AM > Here's a proposed > edit, about 350 words, that we could use > both in print and online. I added a sentence of > background > for those readers unfamiliar with the case: > To the > Editor:Re "The > Cowardly Labor Secretary" (editorial, March 3):Your > editorial's > conclusions are in profound conflict with the reality as > we, > Jeffrey Epstein's current and former lawyers, knew > it. > Alexander EFTA01031658 > Acosta, the labor secretary, as United States attorney > for > the Southern District of Florida in 2007, oversaw a > plea > deal for Mr. Epstein involving charges of sexual abuse >of > young girls. Your underlying premise is that Mr. Acosta > had > capitulated and not filed federal charges because Mr. > Epstein had a "high-priced defense team." This was > categorically > denied by the Southern District's then first > assistant, > Jeffrey H. Sloman, in an Op-Ed > article in The Miami Herald on Feb. 15. Mr. Sloman > correctly represented that the case lacked the credible > and > compelling proof that is required by federal criminal > statutes. He also correctly represented that the > government > had achieved its principal objectives — a felony > plea, > incarceration, millions of dollars in restitution and > monetary settlements, and lifetime sex offender > registration > — through its agreement with Mr. Epstein.That agreement > was > reviewed at multiple levels of the Justice Department. > An > agreement rather than a trial is how over 96 percent of > federal cases get resolved, > through negotiations by two teams of experienced > professionals. [CAN YOU PROVIDE YOUR SOURCE FOR THIS > FIGURE, EFTA01031659 > JUST FOR FACTCHECIUNG7] > That the guilty plea > was in state not federal court reflected the absence of > evidence that Mr. Epstein used the Internet, traveled to >a > location away from his home for the purpose of having > illegal sex, commercially trafficked women to others, > engaged in force, fraud or coercion, used drugs or > alcohol > to entice young women who came to his house to exchange > sexual massages for money, possessed child pornography or >in > other ways violated federal law. Your claims regarding > the number of young women involved in the investigation > were > vastly exaggerated, there was no "international > sex-trafficking operation" > and there was never evidence that Mr. Epstein "hosted > sex > parties" at > his home. Finally, Mr. Epstein > has gone to prison and made enormous monetary > settlements > relying on his negotiated agreement. He is entitled to > finality like every other defendant. Kenneth W. Starr > Martin G. Weinberg > Jack > Goldberger > Lilly Ann Sanchez > On Mon, Mar 4, EFTA01031660 > 2019 at 10:48 AM Martin Weinberg > wrote: > Thank you. I could > circulate when received and we would have a better shot > at > the deadline. If there are particular facts you find > you > need verified, let me know, thanks. All 4 signatories > were > involved at different stages of the 2007-8 negotiations > and > appeals to the DOJ. > Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. > 20 Park Plaza > Suite 1000 > Boston, MA 02116 This Electronic > Message > contains information from the Law Office of Martin G. > Weinberg, P.C., and may be privileged. The information > is EFTA01031661 > intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are > not > the addressee, please note that any disclosure, > copying, > distribution, or use of the contents of this message is > prohibited. > ----------------------------------- > > On Mon, 3/4/19, Mermelstein, Sue aa > wrote: > Subject: Re: letter to editor > To: "Martin Weinberg" -MIEM> > Date: Monday, March 4, 2019, 10:34 AM > Just > saw this. Sure, Pd be happy to do so. EFTA01031662 > On Mon, Mar 4, > 2019 at 10:30 AM Martin Weinberg > wrote: > Alternatively, if you > could take a stab at shortening it subject to my and > Ken > Starr's later review, that would work as well > given > my > other morning commitments, thanks EFTA01031663 > Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. > 20 Park Plaza > Suite 1000 > Boston, MA 02116 > (617) 227-3700 - Office > (617) 901-3472 - Cell This Electronic EFTA01031664 > Message > contains information from the Law Office of Martin G. > Weinberg, M., and may be privileged. The > information > is > intended for the use of the addressee only. If you > are > not > the addressee, please note that any disclosure, > copying, > distribution, or use of the contents of this message > is > prohibited. EFTA01031665 > On Mon, 3/4/19, Martin Weinberg > wrote: > Subject: Re: letter to editor • To: "SueMennelstein" > Cc: "Martin Weinberg" <=la> > Date: Monday, March 4, 2019, 10:26 AM EFTA01031666 > Sue, Thank you. What would be your > deadline for receiving, reviewing an edited version > of > the > letter. > Thinking I would take the first pass, > sending it to the co-authors and then to you. EFTA01031667 • Marty > Martin G. Weinberg, Esq. > 20 Park Plaza > Suite 1000 > Boston, MA 02116 > (617) 227-3700 - Office EFTA01031668 • (617) 901-3472 - Cell This > Electronic Message contains information from the > L,aw > Office > of Martin G. Weinberg, M., and may be privileged. > The > information is intended for the use of the > addressee > only. EFTA01031669 > If you are not the addressee, please note that any > disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the > contents > of > this message is prohibited. > On Mon, 3/4/19, Mermelstein, Sue < M > EFTA01031670 > wrote: > Subject: letter to editor > To: > Cc: > "jgoldberger" EFTA01031671 > > > > Date: Monday, March 4, 2019, 10:21 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr. > > > > > > > > Weinberg et like to give you > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > platform to respond to the editorial; > > > > > > > > however, what you > > EFTA01031672 > > > > > > submitted is much too long for a > > > > > > > > letter and rather difficult > > > > > > > > to follow.Would you like to revise it > > > > > > > > into a > > > > > > > > shorter version that makes your points > > > > > > > > more clearly, or > > > > > > > > would you prefer that I take a stab at EFTA01031673 > it and send it to you > for review? > We'd like it to be no more than 300 > words for > print (longer than our typical 150-250 > words); if you like, EFTA01031674 > > we could offer you a slightly longer > > > > > > > > version online, say 400 > > > > > > > > words, since we have more flexibility > > > > > > > > there.Please let me know which way > > > > > > > > you'd like > > > > > > > > to proceed. > > > > > > > > Best regards,Sue Mermelstein > > > > EFTA01031675 > Sue MermelsteinStaff • Editor, Letters > Follow The New > York Times Opinion section > on Facebook and Twitter, > and sign up for the Opinion Today EFTA01031676 > > > > > > newsletter. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sue > > > > MerrnelsteinStaff Editor, Letters > > > > > > > > Follow The New > > > > York Times Opinion section EFTA01031677 > on Facebook and Twitter, > and sign up for the Opinion Today > newsletter. > -- > > Sue > MermelsteinStall Editor. Letters > Follow The New > York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, > and sign up for the Opinion Today > newsletter. > -- > > Sue > MetmelsteinStaff Editor Letters > Follow The New > York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, > and sign up for the Opinion Today > newsletter. EFTA01031678