EFTA00178938.pdf

DUZ uI.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District ofFlorida Yto t: a.w Cali A ALEXAXDER ACOSTA Mmwit. MITE. OATES .4ITORNel Oar1961'.91rq.firkpispar 104310 Inessairie DiXember 19, 2007 atIV.WL.Y.BY Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler White Burnett, PA 1395 Brickell Ave, 14th Floor - Miaani.1-'1. 33131 Re: Jeffrey Epstein . Dear Ms. Sanchez: se counsel and the Epstein 1 write to follow up on the Decemberl4th meeting between defen al Agent in Charge and myself.' I prosecutors. as well as our First Assistant, the Miami FBI Speci is the appropriate recipient of this write to you because I am not certain who among the defense leant and would thus ask Butt you letter. I address issues raised by several members of the defense team, ers. please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense team memb in my December 4th letter, First, I would like to address the Section 2255 issue.: As I stated entered into between this Office and Mr. my understanding is Hun the Noriffrosectition Agreement tion ofhis state and lederateriminal Epstein responds to Mr. F.pstein's desire to reach a global resolu defer prosecution for enumerated sections liability. Under this Agreement, this District has agreed to I. d pages of arguments and exhibits from defense COUI1W -------- I Ova the past two weeks. we have received several hundre agreem ent. I and our silence should not be interpret as This is not the fumm to respond to the several items raised, II would, however, like to address one Lssue. Your Decem ber e letter slates dial as a result of tkfense counsel of ed an addendum to the Agreement to provide for the OSI: objections to the appointment proem; die USA() propos of defens e cownµ l matter. before I had any knowledge an independent third Irony selector. As I recall this Beath, I did rhos objections. I sun sponse proposed the Adden ditin to Mr. t.CIROWin at an October meeting in Paho on litigious selecti proces s. It was only after I pioposed this in an attempt to avoid what I foresaw would likely be a ns. change dial Mr. LeOcowitr. raised with me his enumerated concer lentttttcrated sections r Section 2255 provides iliac "(airy person who. while a minor, was a victim of a violation of (toned States ( such violation . may suc iet :my appooptime of Tide I RI arid who suffers personal injury as a tomato ersou sustains and the cost of the init. Inc hohm-2. a Disirkt Court and shall recover the actual damages sochup reasonable anewney's fee." EFTA00178938  •• • (La. •.• •.• UV ,/ VVVV / • E. torr UUJ provided that the Mt. Epstein sang-its of Title IX in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, plead guilty to a "registerable state offense. (2) three general federal interests: ( I ) that Mr. Epstein sufficient term of imprisonn teiit: and i it that this suite pica include a binding recommendation for a that the Agreement not harm the interests of his victims ents regarding the Sect tttt 21>5 With this in mind. I have considered defense counsel argum intent has beet. to place the Vieliffis in the portions of the Agreement. As I previously observed, our convicted at trial No more: no less. same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been cl the course of this was the intent From our meeting, it appears that the defense agrees that Paragraphs 7 and 8, which as I wrote previously. negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in se that we solve our disagreements over appear far from simple to understand. I would thus propo I would replace Paragraphs 7 interpretations by saying precisely what we mean, in a simple fashion. and II with the following language: of an offense enumerated in "Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation rights to proceed under Title IX, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same federally and convicted of an Section 2255 as she would have had. if Mr. Epstein beets tried raph. the United States shall enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this parag it was prepared to name m an provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom in Any judicial authority Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epste g which evidentiary hoidens if interpreting this provision, including any authority determinin of the panics to place these any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent have been had Mr. Epstein been identified victims in the same position as they would convicted at trial. No more; no less." pursuant to Section 3771 I Second, I would like readdress the issue of victim's rights notice of lime and place of Mr understand that the defense objects to the victims being given proposed victim notification letter and Epstein's state court sentencinghearing. I have reviewed the the draft letter to defense as a courtesy. In the statute. I would note that the United States provided y incorporated in the letter several addition, First Assistant United States Attorney Sloman alread that Section 1771 applies to notice .of edits that had been requested by defense counsel. I agree s as opposed to the state crime. We intend proceedings and results ofinvestigations of federal crime required by law. We will defer to the to provide victims with notice of the federal resolution, as wishes to provide victims with notice of the discretion of the State Attorney regarding.whether he the information necessary to do so if he wishes. stale proceedings, although we will provide him with ding Florida Statute Section 796.03. At Third, I would like to address the issue raised regar Mr. Epstein believes that Isis conduct does our meeting, ProfessorDershowitz took tbe position that for me substantial concerns. 'Ibis Office not satisfy the elements of t his offense. His assertion raises Mr. Epstein pleads guilty to an offense that will not, and cannot, be a party to an agreement in which best to proceed. he believes he did not commit. We are considering how EFTA00178939  ...f• •.• •.Y••••••• • • Ss VI.4 ta. . Finally. I would like t() address a more general point. Our AgfCCITICIII was first signed on September :•'.4* . 2007. Pursuant to paragraph I I, Mr. Epstein was to use bus best effims to enter his guilty pica and be sentenced no later than October 26.2007. As outlined in correspondence between our prosecutors and defense counsel. this deadline came and went. Our prosecutors reiterated to defense counsel several times their concerns regarding delays, and in fact. asked me several weeks ago to declare the Agreement in breach because of those delays. I resisted that invitation. I share this fact because it is background to my frustration with what appears to be an 1 I s hour appeal, weeks before the now scheduled January 4* plea dale. This said, the issues raised arc important and must he fully vetted irrespective of timeliness concerns. We hope to preserve the January 4* date. I understand that defense counsel shares our desire not to move that appearance and will work with our office to expedite this process over the next several days. With this in mind, and in the event that defense counsel may wish to seek review of our determinations in Washington D.C., I spoke this put Monday with the Assistant Attorney General Fisher, to inform her o f a possible appeal, to ask her to grant the potential request for review, and to in fact review this case in an expedited mariner to attempt to preserve the January 46 pica date. wan to again reiterate that it is, not the intention of this Office ever to knee the hand of a defendant to enter into an agreement against his wishes. Your client has the right to proceed to trial. 'and he should do so if he believes that he did not commit the elements of the charged olfensc. I will respond to the pending issues shortly. In the interim, I would ask that you communicate your position with respect to the sections 2255 and 3371 issues as quickly as possible. Sincerely. R. ALEXANDER Acosyn UNITED STATES ATTORNEY cc: Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney General First Assistant O.S. Attorney AUSA EFTA00178940  4.064••• V • • y. v.ra'.o MN Vile 11.S. Department ofJustice United SISSIES AIWIlley Southern District ofFlorida Yu f: Left.. Atf-tePney ACO$TA ILVIcAD.STATLS Mail. FL nit' ',Oil 96/ 91124 telephone pen i 1O.6sis Inesmok December 1% 2007 DELLYI..ija Fn IMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler Whim Burnett, PA 1395 Brickell Ave, 14th Floor Miami, Ft 33131 Re: Jeffretfatn Dear Ms. Sanchez: counsel and the Epstein I write to follow up on the December14th meeting between defense al Agent in Charge and myself.' I prosecutors. as well as nur First Assistant, the Miami FBI Speci is the appropriate recipient of this write to you because I am not certain who among the defense team team, and would thus ask that you letter. I address issues raised by several members of the defense members. please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense team in niy December 4th letter, First, I would like to address the Section 2255 issue.' As I stated d into between this Office and Mr. my understanding is that the Non.Prosecution Agreement entere tion ofhis state and fedenti criminal Epatein responds to Mr. Epstein's desire to reach a global resolu prosecution for enumerated sections liability. Under this Agreement, this District has agreed to daft nts and exhibits from defense counsel. the past two weeks. we have vazeived several hundred pages of argume silence should not be interpret as agreeritent. I I Over This is not the Comm to respond to the several items raised, and our that as a result of defense counsel would, however, like to address one issue. Yow December Il e' letter manes USA() proposed an addend um 10 the Agreement to provide for the ose of oblations to the appointment process, the I any knowle dge of defense counsel an independent third party selector. As I recall this matter. before had air Octobe r matin g nr Palm Beach. I did rhos itZ at objections. I Sun sponse proposed the Addcndtun to Mr. lelkow selection process. It was only after I proposed this in an anempt to avoid what I foresaw would likely be a litigious change that Mr. Lebowitz. raised with me his enumerated concerns. of le -rated sections 2 Section 2251 provides that "fa th y person who. white a minor, was a victim oi a violation tinned Stales violation . may one in any approp riate of Talc I RI and who suffers personal injury as a result of such cost of the soli. inclwb or, a DIsukt Court and !Alan recover the *coral damages such person sustains and the reasonable anorney's fee." EFTA00178941  ens,' Aweaw ina UM'. GAZA#V&I'L uresi.C. State of Florida, provided that the Mt. Epstein satiAes of Title 18 in favor of prnseculion by the plead guilty to a "registerable- state offense. three general federal interests: ( I ) that Mr. Epstein ation for a sufficient term of imprisonment: and ( ; that this state plea include a binding recommend s that the Agreement not harm the interests of his victim ents regarding the Section .?2)5 With this in mind, I have considered defense counsel argum our intent has been to place die victims in the portions of the Agreement. As I previously observed, been convicted at trial. No more: no less. same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein that this teas the intent burins the course of From our meeting, it appears that the &dense agrees raphs 7 and 8, which as I wrote previously. negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Parag propose that we solve our disagreements over appear far from simple to understand. I would thus e fashion. I would replace Paraeraphs 7 interpretations by saying precisely what we mean, in a simpl and 8 with the following language: ion of an offense enumerated in "Any person:who while a minor, was a victim of a violat the same rights to proceed tinder Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have tried federally and convicted of an Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein been paragraph. the United States shall enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this whom awes prepared to name in an provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals Mr. Epstein Any judicial authority Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by ining whichevidentiary burdens if interpreting this provision, including any authority determ the intent of the panics to place these any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is have been had Mr. Epstein been identified victims in the same position as they would convicted at trial. No more; no less." rights pursuant to Section 377 I I Second, I would like to address the issue of victim's given notice of time and place of Mr understand that the defense objects to the victims being ed the proposed victim stratification letter and Epstein's state court sentencinglicit-Mg. I have review the draft letter to defense as a courtesy. In the statute. I would note that the United States provided n already incorporated in the letter several addition, First Assistant United States Attorney Monta I agree dial Section 1771 applies to notice .of edits thin had been requested by defense counsel. crimes asWici0.4 to the state crime. We intend proceedings antiresults of inVestigations of federal tion, as required by law. We will defer to the to provide victims with notice of the federal resolu he wishes to provide victims with notice of the discretion of the State Attorney regarding whether the information necessary to do so if he wishes. state proceedings, although we will provide him with regarding Florida Statute Section 796.03. At Third, I would like to address the issue raised on that Mr. Epstein believes that his conduct does our meeting, Professor Dershowitz took the positi not satisfy the elements of this offense. Ills assertion raises for me substantial concerns. This office Mr. Epstein pleads guilty to an offense that will not, and cannot, be a pany to an agreement in which how hest to proceed. he believes he did not commit. We arc considering 2 EFTA00178942  Srass..•.•• • • •,.. us' • ••Co Finally. I would like to address a more general point. Our Agreement was first signed on September 24* . 2007. Pursuant to paragraph I I, Mr. Epstein was in use his best ellons to enter his guilty plea and he sentenced no later than October 26. 2007. As Outlined in correspondence between our prosecutors and defense counsel. this deadline came and went o m prosecutors reiterated to defense counsel several times their concerns regarding delays, and in fact. asked me several weeks ago to declare the Agreement in breach because of those delays. I resisted that invitation. I share this fact because it is background to my frustration with what appears to be an Il e hour appeal, was before the now scheduled January 4th plea date. This said, the issues raised are important and must be fully vetted irrespective of timeliness concerns. We hope to preserve the January 4th date. I understand that &Rise counsel shares our desire not to move Mai appearance and will work with our office to expedite this process over the next several days. With this in mind, and in the event that defense counsel new wish to seek review of our determinations in Washington D.CI, I spoke this past Monday with the Assistant Attorney General Fisher, to inform her of a possible appeal, to ask her to grant the potential request for review, and to in fact review this casein an expedited manner to attempt to preserve the January 46 plea date. I want to again reiterate that it is not the intention of this Office ever to force the hand of a defendant to enter into an agreement agaiaSthis wishes. Your client has the right to proceed to trial. if he shoukl do so he believes that he did not commit the elements of the charged offense. I will respond to the pending issues shortly. In the interim, I would ask that you communicate your position with respect to the sections 2255 and 3371 estates as quickly as possible. Sincerely. R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATFS ArfoRNEY cc: Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney General First Assistant U.S. Attorney A(JSA EFTA00178943  ....aaay.it • a. • aa tat a' a, 11.S. Department of Justice United Sides Atturncy Southern District ofFlorida V f,:b: Lino.. It ALEXANDI:It ACO$7.1 Mani, Irt. I11;: MONO Vali nail 96! 9100 fekigwane O0.4 i 104111 Vocuentle December 19, 2007 Dat/Liig.13Y Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler White Burnett, PA 1395 Brickcll Ace. 14th Floor Miami. Fl. 33131 Re: Jeffiettat sstin Dear Ms. Sanchez: defense counsel and the F.pstein I write to follow up on the December 14 a' meeting between al Agent in Charge and myself.' prosecutors. as well as nur First Assistant, the Miami FBI Speci is the appropriate recipient alibis write to you because I am not certain who among the defense team and would thus ask that you letter. I address issues raised by several members of the defense team, team members. please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense I slated in my December 4' letter, First, I would like to address the Section 2255 issue! As d into between this Office and Mr. my understanding is that the Non-Prosecution Agreement entere l resolution o f his state and; lidera1criminal Epstein responds to Mr. Epstain's desire to reach a globa prosecution for entontrated sections liability. Under this Agreement, this District has agreed to defer •—• • e counsel. hundred pages of arguments and exhibits from defens ' Over the past two weeks. we have received several be interpr et as agreem ent. I raised, and our silence should not This is not the Comm to respond to the several items a result or dercns t COW/S e' letter slates that as would, however, like to address one issue. Your December s, the USAO propos ed an addend um to the Agreement to provide for the use of objections to the appointment proem counsel mutter, before I had any knowledge of &raise art independent third party selector. As I recall this I did tors I.elkOwitz at :III October nutting iii Palm Beach objections. I sun sponse proposed the Addendum 10 Mr. I proposed this be a litigious selection proceSt. It was only after in an anempt to avoid what I foresaw would likely rated concerns. change that Mr. Lefkowiir raised with me his enume rated sections a minor, was a victim al a violation of 'enume 'Section 225S provides dot "paltry person who, while avvinp riale tinned States result of sue,/ violation navy sue in any of Tale I RI and who others personal injury aS a der. rson sustains and the cosy of Wit 111CIUL IIIIr. fAsorki Cowl turd shall recover the actual damages suctipe reasonable annmey's EFTA00178944  by ••• ••••• sia,• • • ..•••• OA dela VW0 VV. V.VIJ MALMAAJA&VC Vrfl4t. Melia a, provided that the Mr. Epstein satisfies 01"fitle IR in favor of prosecution by the State of Florid Epstein plead guilty to a "registerable- state offense.12) three general federal interests: ( I) that Mr. a sufficient term of imprisonmeiif :anti ( 3) that this state pica include a binding recommendation for that the Agreement not harm the interests of his victims ents regarding the Sec 12:, 5 With this in mind, I have considered defense counsel argum ved, our intent has been to place the victims iu the portions of the Agreement. As I previously obser beenconvicted al trial No more: on less. same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein this was the intent During the course of F our meeting, it appears that the defense agrees that raphs 7 and 8, which as I wrote previously. negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Parag propose that we solve our disagreements over appear far from simple to understand. I would thus fashion. I would replace Paragraphs 7 interpretations by saying precisely what we mean, in a simple and 8 with the following language: an offense enumerated in "Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of the same rights to proceed under Title 18, United Stales Code, Section 2255. will have federally and convicted of an Section 2255 as she would have had. if Mr. Epstein been tried raph. the United States shall enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this parag whom it was prepared to name in an provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals in Any judicial authority Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epste which evidentiary burdens if interpreting this provision, including any authority determining the intent of the panics to place these any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is been had Mr. Epstein been •r, identified victims in the same position as they would have convicted at trial. No more; no less." pursuant to Section 3771 I Second, I would like to address the issue of victim's rights given notice of time and place of Mr understand that the defense objects to the victims being reviewed the proposed victim notilication luta and Epstein's state coon sentencing hearing. I have draft letter to defense as a courtesy. In the statute. I would note that the United States provided the n already incorporated in the letter several addition, First Assistant United States Attorney Sloma agree that Section ≥771 applies to notice of edits that had been requi ted by defense counsel. I crimes as 0040 to the state crime. We intend proceedings andresults of investigations of federal as required by law. We will defer to the to provide victims with notice of the federal resolution, he wishes to provide victims with notice of the discretion of the State Attorney regarding.whether information necessaty to do so ifhe wishes. state proceedings, although we will provide him with the ing Florida Statute Section 796.03. At Third, I would like to address the issue raised regard Epstein believes that his conduct does our meeting, PmfessorDershowitz took the position that Mr. ion raises for me substantial concerns. 'Ifix OlYrei not satisfy the elements of this offense. His assert in which Mr. Epstein pleads Laiby to an offense that will not, and cannot, be a party to an agreement how best to proceed. he believes he did not commit. We are considering 2 EFTA00178945  a.Y.••V a • • a: %PA' VA in.% Finally. I would like to address a more general point. Our Agreement was first signed on his September 24th, 2007. Pursuant to paragraph I I, Mr. Epstein was to use his best efforts to enter guilty plea and he sentenced no later than October 26. 2007. As outlined in correspond ence between our prosecutors and defense counsel, this deadline came and went. Our prosecutors reiterated to defense aninset several times their concerns regarding delays, and in fact. asked me several weeks ago to declare the Agreement in breach because of those delays. I resisted that invitation. I share this fact because it is background to my frustration with what appears to be an 11°' hour appeal, weeks before the now scheduled January 4th plea dale. This slid, the issues raised are important and must be fully vetted irrespective of titnclittess concerns. We hope to preserve the January 4" date. I understand that defense counsel shares our desire not to move that appearance and wilt work with our office to expedite this process over the next several days. With this in mind, and in the event that defense counsel new wish to seek review of our determinations in Washington D.C., I spoke this past Monday with the Assistant Attorney General Fisher, to inform her of a possible appeal, to ask her to grant the potential request for review, date. and to in fact review this case in an expedited manner to attempt to preserve the January 4th plea I want to again reiterate that it is. not the intention of this Office ever to force the hand of a defendant in enter into an agreement against his wishes. Your client has the right to proceed to trial. • and he should do so if he believes.that he did not commit the elements of die charged offense. I will respond to the pending issues shortly. In the interim, I would ask that you communicate your position with respect to the sections 2255 and 3371 issues as quickly as possible. Sincerely. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTOkNEY cc: Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney General First Assistant U.S. Attorney EFTA00178946  • • y.. yr r &MG en Litt a U.S. Department of Justice United Stotts Attorney Southern District ofFlorida 99 S Sir C41 ALEXAVIM11 ACOSTA Mans. FE NIP avtreogrAras .4117MNfl 001961.9W folipanne 003, i Inetaindt December 19, 2007 p_Eto v.ti Y.13X FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez. Fowler White Burnett, PA 1395 Brickell Ave, le Floor • Miami. Fl. 33131 Re: le fficyfrstein Dear Ms. Sanchez: se counsel and the Epstein I write to follow up on the December le' meeting between defen al Agent in Charge and myself.' prosecutors. as well as Our First Assistant, the Miami FBI Speci priate recipient of this write to you because I am not certain who among the defense team is the appro and would thus ask that you letter. I address issues raised by several members of the defense team, team members. please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense slated in my December 411' lenet, First, I would like to address the Section 2255 issue.: As I d into between this Office and Mr. my understanding is that the Non-Prosecution Agreement entere tion ofhis state and fe.deral criminal Epstein responds to Mr. Epstein's desire to reach a global resolu defer prosecution for enumerated sections liability. Under this Agreement, this District.has agreed to l. d pages of arguments and exhibits front defense counse ' Over the past two weeks. we have received several hundre as agreem ent. I and our silence should not be interpr et This is not the foam to respond to the several items raised, Your l)ccem ber I te letter states that as a result or defense counsel would, however, like to address one issue. of ed an addendum to the Agteement to provide for the use objections to the appointment process, the OSA() propos dge counse l before I had any knowle of defense an independent third party selector. As I recall this matter, propos ed the Adden dum to Mr. I.clkow itz at an October Meeting in palm Beath. I did dos 0njeclionS. I sue' Vora, I ptoposcd this litigious selection peoceSs. It was only after in an attempt to avoid what I foresaw would likely be a his enumerated concea ls. change that Mr. Lefkowitz raised with nie n of le:numerated sections 2 Seethe' 22M provides that: "rainy person who. while a minor, was a victim of a violatio riate (limed States iesult dutch violation. may sue in any approp of tole i R1 and who suffers personal injury as a ing a DiSinei Catlin and shall recover the actual damages such person sustains and the cosi of the suit. includ reasonable attorney's fee- EFTA00178947  se..., Av..... on, w...• ovu yrs./ WICArt#AA/IL Uell4C State of Florida, provided that the Mr. Epstein satisfies of Title 18 in favor of prosecution by the guilty to a "registerable" stale offense. (2) three general federal interests: (I ) that Mr. Epstein plead fora sufficient term of imprisomneia: and ( ; that this state plea include a binding recommendation that the Agreement not harm the interests of his victims ents regaiding the Section :U:15 With this in mind, I have considered defense counsel argum our intent has been m place the victims in the portions of the Agreement. As I previously observed, convicted at trial No more: no less. same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been that this was the intent During the course of From our meeting, ii appears that the defense agrees raphs 7 and 8, which as I wrote previously. negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Parag se that we solve our disagreements over appear far from simple to understand. I would thus propo simple fashion. I would replace Paragraphs 7 interpretations by saying precisely what we mean, in a and 8 with the following language: ion of an offense enumerated in "Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violat same rights to proceed under Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the tried federally and convicted of an Section 2255 as she would have bad, if Mr. Epstein been raph. the United State shall enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing this parag it was prepared to name in an provide Mr. Epstein's attorneys with a list of individuals whom Epstein Any judicial authority Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. ining which evidentiary burdens