Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00104861DOJ Data Set 9Other

Cc: r>

From: To: ' Cc: r> " , '1 Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York - concession by Epstein's attorney that NPA only applies in Florida Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 19:07:23 +0000 Attachments: Exh_067_EPSTEIN_PLEA_CONFERENCE_CRIMINAL_06-30-08.pdf HIM, You and the team there may have already seen this, but in view of the importance of the issue, I wanted to pass it along. Attached is the transcript of the hearing from Florida state court in 2008, in which Epstein pled guilty to Florida state charges. During the course of questioning by the judge, Epstein's Florida attorney (Jack Goldberger) stated (on Epstein's behalf) that the NPA contained an obligation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida "not [to] prosecute Mr. Epstein in the Southern District of Florida ...." See page 38 (emphasis added). I wanted you to be sure to have this information, as the subject is likely to be important. for Jane Doe 1 (phone

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00104861
Pages
3
Persons
0
Integrity

Summary

From: To: ' Cc: r> " , '1 Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York - concession by Epstein's attorney that NPA only applies in Florida Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 19:07:23 +0000 Attachments: Exh_067_EPSTEIN_PLEA_CONFERENCE_CRIMINAL_06-30-08.pdf HIM, You and the team there may have already seen this, but in view of the importance of the issue, I wanted to pass it along. Attached is the transcript of the hearing from Florida state court in 2008, in which Epstein pled guilty to Florida state charges. During the course of questioning by the judge, Epstein's Florida attorney (Jack Goldberger) stated (on Epstein's behalf) that the NPA contained an obligation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida "not [to] prosecute Mr. Epstein in the Southern District of Florida ...." See page 38 (emphasis added). I wanted you to be sure to have this information, as the subject is likely to be important. for Jane Doe 1 (phone

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: To: ' Cc: r> " , '1 Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York - concession by Epstein's attorney that NPA only applies in Florida Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2019 19:07:23 +0000 Attachments: Exh_067_EPSTEIN_PLEA_CONFERENCE_CRIMINAL_06-30-08.pdf HIM, You and the team there may have already seen this, but in view of the importance of the issue, I wanted to pass it along. Attached is the transcript of the hearing from Florida state court in 2008, in which Epstein pled guilty to Florida state charges. During the course of questioning by the judge, Epstein's Florida attorney (Jack Goldberger) stated (on Epstein's behalf) that the NPA contained an obligation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida "not [to] prosecute Mr. Epstein in the Southern District of Florida ...." See page 38 (emphasis added). I wanted you to be sure to have this information, as the subject is likely to be important. for Jane Doe 1 (phone) (fax) You can access my publications on CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message In error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. is admitted to the Utah State Bar, but not the bars of other states. Any views he expresses in this email are his own. From: Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 8:25 PM To: M I Cc: Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York Will do. From: Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 22:24 To: Cc: Subject: Re: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York Perfect - call my cell - - sent from my iPhone - please excuse brevity and errors. EFTA00104861 On Jul 25, 2019, at 8:21 PM, wrote: Thanks very much. Would 10:00 a.m. tomorrow your time (noon our time) work? If so, we can call you then at or if not, we could also do 2:00 p.m. your time. thanks, From: IM Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 22:13 To: Cc: Subject: Re: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York Happy to chat tomorrow. Name your time that's convenient for you. - sent from my iPhone - please excuse brevity and errors. On Jul 25, 2019, at 8:07 PM, wrote: Thank you for sending us these materials, we appreciate being able to stay up to date, and we'll continue to keep an eye on the docket for submissions that may be relevant for our investigation. Separately, might you be available for a quick call sometime tomorrow (Friday) or next week? No rush or emergency, but we wanted to talk with you about a question in connection with your expertise on the CVRA generally. At your convenience. thanks, From: MI Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 13:01 To: Cc: Subject: RE: Briefing in Florida regarding whether the Florida NPA extends to New York Hi MI, I wanted to make you aware of a recent filing (on Tuesday) by Jane Doe 1 and 2 in the Florida CVRA case. See attached. You may find interesting our argument at pp. 3-6, in which we explain why Judge Marra must craft remedies in the case that relate solely to Florida crimes and Florida victims ... because the NPA only covers Florida. We filed our reply brief on remedies on Tuesday — and that should have brought all briefing on remedies for the CVRA violation to a close. But yesterday Epstein's lawyer (Marty Weinberg) filed a motion for a sur-reply. See attached. In point (a) on page 2, he argues that he should have an opportunity to file a sur-reply discussing, among other things, the scope of the NPA. On Monday, we will be filing an opposition to Weinberg extending the briefing further. It appears that Judge Marra is poised to rule rapidly on the motion for a sur-reply, as he asked for us to respond quickly. I wanted to make you aware of these developments. My clients were told back in 2013 that the NPA did not extend to New York or other jurisdictions — and that is the point we are making to Judge Marra. EFTA00104862 for Jane Doe 1 and 2 (phone) (fax) You can access my publications on CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message - along with any/all attachments - is confidential. This message is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply electronic mail and delete the original message. is admitted to the Utah State Bar, but not the bars of other states. Any views he expresses in this email are his own. EFTA00104863

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM

Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/2008 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. VICTIM'S MOTION TO UNSEAL NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT COMES NOW the Petitioners, Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2, by and through their undersigned attorneys, pursuant to the Crime Victim's Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3771 ("CVRA"), and file this motion to unseal the non-prosecution agreement that has been provided to their attorneys under seal in this case. The agreement should be unsealed because no good cause exists for sealing it. Moreover, the Government has inaccurately described the agreement in its publicly-filed pleadings, creating a false impression that the agreement protects the victims. Finally, the agreement should be unsealed to facilitate consultation by victims' counsel with others involved who have

8p
House OversightNov 4, 2011

Epstein deposition excerpt cited in Florida civil case alleging child sexual abuse

Epstein deposition excerpt cited in Florida civil case alleging child sexual abuse The passage merely references a prior deposition where Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment, offering no new names, transactions, or actionable details beyond what is already public. It confirms existing allegations but provides no novel leads for investigation. Key insights: Cites Epstein's deposition on March 17, 2010; Notes Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked about sexual preferences; Mentions adverse inference doctrine in civil procedure

1p
Court UnsealedSep 9, 2019

Epstein Depositions

10. 11. 12. l3. 14. 16. 17. l8. 19. Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley J. Edwards, et Case No.: 50 2009 CA Attachments to Statement of Undisputed Facts Deposition of Jeffrey Epstein taken March 17, 2010 Deposition of Jane Doe taken March 11, 2010 (Pages 379, 380, 527, 564?67, 568) Deposition of LM. taken September 24, 2009 (Pages 73, 74, 164, 141, 605, 416) Deposition ofE.W. taken May 6, 2010 (1 15, 1.16, 255, 205, 215?216) Deposition of Jane Doe #4 (32-34, 136) Deposition of Jeffrey Eps

839p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-MarratIVIatthewman JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2, Petitioners, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. UNITED STATES' NOTICE OF FILING THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL PRIVILEGE LOG Pursuant to the Court's June 18, 2013 Omnibus Order (DE 190), the Respondent, United States of America, by and through the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, hereby gives notice of its filing of its Third Supplemental Privilege Log. The index has been marked with Bates Numbers P-014924 thru P-015267. The documents referenced in the Third Supplemental Privilege Log will be delivered tomorrow to the Chambers of U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra for ex parte in camera review, pursuant to the Court's Omnibus Order. Respectfully submitted, WIFREDO A. FERRER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: s/A. Marie Villafafia A. MARIE VILLAFAFIA Assistant United States Attorney Florida Bar No. 0018255 500 South Australian Ave, Suite 40

446p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 013-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2 v. UNITED STATES JANE DOE #1 AND JANE DOE #2'S MOTION FOR FINDING OF VIOLATIONS OF THE CRIME VICTIMS' RIGHTS ACT AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING ON APPROPRIATE REMEDIES COME NOW Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 (also referred to as "the victims"), by and through undersigned counsel, to move for a finding from this Court that the victims' rights under the Crime Victims Rights Act (CVRA), 18 U.S.C. § 3771, have been violated by the U.S. Attorney's Office, and to request a hearing on the appropriate remedies for these violations. The victims have proffered a series of facts to the Government, which they have failed to contest. Proceeding on the basis of these facts,' it is clear that the U.S. Attorney's Office has repeatedly violated the victims' protected CVRA rights, including their right to confer with prosecutors generally about the case and specifically abou

41p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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 OF AMERICA, Respondent. RESPONDENT'S INITIAL DISCLOSURES Respondent United States of America, by and through its undersigned counsel, makes its Initial Disclosures, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1)(A), and state: Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1)(A)fil: 1. R. Alexander Acosta Dean, School of Law Florida International University Rafael Diaz-Balart Hall 11200 S.W. 8'h Street Miami, Florida 33199 (305) 348-1118 Dean Acosta was the United States Attorney, Southern District of Florida, during the time when the criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein was opened in the U.S. Attorney's Office, and the non-prosecution agreement was negotiated. 2. was the First Assistant U.S. Attorney in the U.S. Attorney's Office, during the time when the criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein was opened, and the non-prosecution agreement was negot

10p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.