Aether Re UEP A U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida BR ALEXANDER ACOSTA YUN KE 4 Sweee UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Mime, FU TG" (105) 964-9100 . Telephone (105) 110-6444 Factmile December 19, 2007 DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler White Burnett, PA 1395 Brickell Ave, 14" Floor Miami, FL 33031 Re. Jeffrey Epstcin Dear Ms. Sanchez: I write to follow up on the December 14" meeting between defense counsel and the Epstein prosecutors, as well as our First Assistant, the Miami FBI Special Agent in Charge and myself! | write to you because | am not certain who among the defense team is the appropriate recipient of this letter, 1 address issues raised by several members of the defense team, and would thus ask that you please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense (cam members. First, I would like to address the Section 2255 issue.” As {stated in my December 4" leuer, my understanding is thal the Non-Prosccution Agreement entered into between this Office and Mr. Epstein responds to Mr. Epstein’s desire to reach a global resolution of his state and federal enminal liability. Under this Agecement, this District has agreed to defer prosecution for enumerated sections * Over the past two weeks, we have received several hundred pages of arguments and exhibus from defense counsel This is not the forum to ecspond to the several items raisca, and our silence should not be interpret as agreement. t would, however, like to address one issue. Your December | 1 fetter states that as a result of defense counscl objections to the appointment process, the USAO proposed an addendum to the Agrecment to provide for the ose of an independent third party sclector. As! reeall this matter, before had any knowledge of defense counsel objections, | sua sponte proposed the Addendimn to Mr, Lctkowit2 at 30 October meeting in Palin Beach, | did thus in an attempt to avoid what I foresaw would likcly be a litigious sclection process Ii was only after | proposed this change that Mr. Lefkowitz caised with me his cnumerated concerns. ? Section 2255 provides that: “[a}ny person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violavon of [enumerated sections of Title U8] and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation may suc in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actwal damages such persoa sustains and the cost of the sun, sacludiay & reasonable anorncy’s fee,” guuZ EFTA00178938

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

wee ee ee mee aw ~ aa wey vey “vane BALCULAYE urrive of Title 18 ia favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, provided that the Mr, Epstein satisfies three general [ederal interests: (J) that Mr. Epstein plead guilty to a “registerable™ state offense. (2) that this state plea include a binding, recommendation fora sufficient term of imprisonment: and (3) that the Agreement not harm the interests of hus victims With this in mind, | have considered defense counsel arguments regarding the Section 2295 portions of the Agreement. As | previously observed, var intent has becn to place the victims inthe same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at tral No more: no less From our mecting, it appears that the defense ageces that this was the intent During the course of negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Paragraphs 7 and &_ which as | wrote previously, appear far from simple to understand. 1 would thus propose that we solve our disagreements over interpretations by saying, preciscly what we mean, ina simple fashion. | would replace Paragraphs 7 and & with the following language: “Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same nights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein been tried federally and convicted ofan enumerated offense, For purposes of implementing Uts paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Epsicin’s attorneys witha list of individuals whona it was prepared to name man Indictment as victims of an cnumerated offense by Mr. Epstein Avy judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any it plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less.” Second, | would like to address the issuc of victim's rights pursuant to Section 3771 1 understand that the defense objects to the victims being given notice of time and place of Mr Epstein’s state court sentencing hearing. | have reviewed the proposed victim notification letter and the statute. I would note that the United States provided the draft letter to defense as a courtesy. In addition, First Assistant United States Attorney Sloman already incorporated in the letter several edits that had been requested by defense counsel. | agree that Section 3771 applies to notice of proceedings and results of investigations of federal crimes as opposed to the state crime. We intend to provide victims with notice of the fedcral resolution, as required by law, We will defer to the discretion of the State Attorney regarding whether he wishes to provide victims with notice of the state procecdings, although we will provide him with the information necessary to do sa if he wishes. Third, | would like to address the issue raised regarding Florida Statute Section 796.05. At our meeting, Professor Dershowitz took the position that Mr. Epstein believes that his conduct docs not satisfy the clements of this offense. His assertion raises for me substantial concerms. This Office will not, and cannot, be a party fo an aprcement in which Mr. Epstein pleads quilty (oan offense that he believes he did not commit. We are considering how best to procecd. w juus EFTA00178939

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

eALeveee te VE ate Finally, | would like to address a more general point. Our Agrcement was first signed on September 24", 2007. Parsuant to paragraph 11, Mr. Epstein was to use hes best efforts to enter his yuilly plea and be sentenced no later than October 26,2007. As outlined in Correspondence between our prosecutors and defense counsel, dus deadline came and went. Our prosecutors reiterated to defense counscl several times their concems regarding delays, and an fact. asked me several weeks ago to declare the Agreement in breach because of those delays. | resisted that invitation. [ share this fact because it is background to my frustration with what appears to be aa | 1" hour appeal, weeks before the now scheduled January 4" plea date. This said, the issues raised are important and must be fully vetted irrespective of timeliness concerns. We hope to preserve the January 4" date. | 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 iu the event that defense counsel may wish to seek review of our determinations in Washington D.C., | 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 case in an expedited manner to attempt to preserve the January 4" plea date. | want to again reiterate that it is not the intention of this Office ever to force the hand ef a defendant to enter intu an agreement against his wishes, Your client has the right fo proceed to trial, cand he should do so if he believes that he did not commit the clements of the charged offense. I will respond to the pending issues shortly. In the interm, | would ask that you communicate your position with respect to the sections 2255 and 3371 issues as quickly as possible. Sincerely. | 5a R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ce: Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney General |, First Assistant U.S. Attoracy AUSA 4 wud EFTA00178940

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

a ee hos U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern Disirict of Flarida R ALEXANDER ACOSTA YON E 4 Suees UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Mere, FL AEE (108) 961-9100. Telepivine (105) 110-6949 Fecwemile December 19, 2007 DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler White Bumett, PA 1395 Brickell Ave, 14" Floor Mian, FL. 33131 Re. Jeffrey Epstein Dear Ms. Sanchez: I write to follow up on the December 14 meeting between defense counsel and the Epstem prosecutors, as well as our First Assistant, the Miami FBI Special Agent in Charge and myself! | write to you because | am not certain who among the defense team is the appropriate recipient of this letter, | address issues raised by several members of the defense cam, and would thus ask that you please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense tcam members. First, | would like to address the Section 2255 issue.” As I stated in my December 4" lever, my understanding is that the Non-Prosccution Agreement entered into between this Office and Mr. Epstein responds to Mr, Epstein’s desice to reach a global resolution of his state and federal criminal liability. Under this Agreement, this Nistrict has agreed to defer prosecution for enumerated scctions * Over the past nwo weeks. we have received several hundred pages of arguments and exhibus from defense counsel This is not the foram to respond to the several items raised, and our silence should aot be interpret as agreement. | would, however, like to address one issue, Your December | 1 fetter states that as a result of defense counsel objections to the appointment process, the USAO proposed au addendum to the Agreement to provide for the use of an independent third party sclector. As 1 recall this matter, before U had any knowledge of defense counsel objections, | sua sponte proposed the Addendum to Mr. Lctkowitz at an October meeting in Patnr Beach, 1 did thes in an attempt to avoid what | foresaw would likely be a litigious scleetion process, I was only after | propased thes change that Mr, Lefkowitz rauscd with me his cnumerated concems 2 Section 2255 provides that: “[a]ny person whe. while a minor, was u victim of a violanon of [enumerated sections af Tale ER} and who suffers personal mnjury as a result of such violation may sue ML any Appropriale Unned States District Court and shall recover the actwal damages such 'persoa sustans and the cost Of the suit ine ludins reasonable antoracy's fee.” wuuz EFTA00178941

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

CACLUAATO urrace of Title 18 in Favor of proscention hy the State of Florida, provided that the Mr. Epstein satisfies three general federal interests (J) that Mr. Epstein plead guilty toa “revisterable” ste offense. (2) that this state plea melude a binding recommendation fora sulficient term of mmprisoament, and (sy that the Agreement not harm the interests of lus victems With this in mind, [ have considered defense counsel arguments regarding the Section 22 »> portions of the Agrecment. As | previously observed, our intent has becn to place the victinis inthe same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial No more. no less From our mecting, it appears that the defense ageces that this was the intent Dur nepotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Paragraphs 7 and &, which as | wre appear far from simple to understand. | would thus propose that we solve our dt interpretations by saying, precisely what we mean, ina simple fashion. | would rep and & with the following, language: ec previously. reements over ce Parapraphs 7 “Any person, who while a minor, was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same riphts lo proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Me. Epstein been tried tederalty and convicted ofan c. For purposes of implementing thes paragraph. the United States shall *s attorneys with a list of individuals whan it was prepared to name man | authority enumerated offer provide Mr. Epst Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstem Any judie interpreting this provision, including any authority determining, which evidentiary burdens Ww any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the partics to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less.” Second, | would like (o address the issue of victim's rights pursuant to Section 3771 1 understand that the defense objects to the victims being given notice of time and place of Mr Epstein’s slate court sentencing hearing. | have reviewed the proposed victin notification letter and the statute. | would note that the United States provided the draft letter to defense as a courtesy. [In addition, First Assistant United States Attorney Sloman already incorporated in the letter several edits that had been requested by defense counsel. | agree that Section 377) applies to notice of proceedings and results of investigations of federal crimes as oppased to the state crime, We intend (o provide victims with notice of the federal resolution, as required by law. We will defer to the discretion of the State Auorncy regarding whether he wishes to provide victims with notice of the state proceedings, although we will provide him with the information necessary to do so if he wishes. Third, | would like to address the issue rused regarding Florida Statute Section 796.035. At our meeting, Professor Dershowitz. took the position that Mr. Epstein believes that his conduct docs not satisfy the clements of this offense. His assertion raises for me substantial concerns. This Office will not, and cannot, be a party fo an agrcement in which Mr. Epstein pleads quilly to an offense that he believes he did not commit, We are considering how best to proceed e the course of muus EFTA00178942

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

eee VE Finally, | would like to address a more general point, Our Ayrcement was first signed on September 24". 2007, Pursuant to parageaph EL, Mr. iepsten was to use hus best efforts to enter his entenced no later than October 26. 2007. As outlined in correspondence between yuilty plea and be s our prosecutors and defense counsel, (his deadline came and went. Our prosecutors reiterated to defense counsel several times their concems regarding delays, and on fact. asked me several weeks ago to declare the Agreement in breach because of those delays. | resisted that invitation. [ shave this fact because it is background to my frustration with what appears to be an | 1" hour appeal, weeks before the now scheduled January 4" plea date. This said, the issues raised are important and must he fully vetted irrespective of tincliness concerns. We hope to preserve the January 4" date. L 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 iu the event that defcase counsel may wish to scck review of our determinations in Washington D.C., | spoke this past Monday with the Assistant Attorney General Fisher, to inform her ofa possible appeal, to ask her to grant the potential request for review, and to in fact review this case in an expedited manner to atiempt to preserve the January 4" plea date. | want to again reiterate that it ts not the intention of this Office ever to force the hand of a defendant to enter into an agreement againsthis wishes, Your client has the right to proceed to trial, cand he should do so if he believes that he did not commit the clements of the charged offense. 1 will respond to the pending issues shortly. In the intenm, | would ask that you communicate your position with respect to the sections 2255 and 33711 as quickly as possible. sue Sincerely, | 4 R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ce: Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney Gencral First Assistant U.S. Attorney AUSA a) wives EFTA00178943

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

ek Ue muuse U.S. Departinent of Justice United States Attorney Sowhern District of Flarida R ALEXANDER ACOSTA YEN KE 4s Swear UNITE ( STATES ATTORNEY Murm, FL WLS! (105) 961 9100 Telephone (Ws) Gass Facwmile December 19, 2007 DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler White Bumett, PA 1395 Brickell Ave, 14" Floor Miami, FE 33131 Re. — Jeffrey Epstcin Dear Ms. Sanchez: I write to foHow up on the December 14" meeting between defense counsel and the Epstein prosecutors, as well as our First Assistant, the Miami FBI Special Agent in Charge and myself! | write to you because | am not certain who among the defense team is the appropriate recipient of this letter. address issues raised by several members of the defeuse tcam, and would thus ask that you please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense (cam members. First, | would like to address the Section 2255 issue” As [stated in my December 4" leuer, my understanding is thal the Nen-Prosceution Agreement entered into between this Office aad Mr. Epstein responds to Mr. Epstein's desige to reach a global resolution of his state and federal criminal liability. Under this Agreement, this District has apreed to defer prosecution for chumerated sections * Over the past nve weeks, we have received several hundred pages of arguments and exhibus from defense counsel This is not the foram te respond to the several items raised, and our silence should not be interpret as agreement, | would, however, like to address one issuc Your December 11 letter states that as a result of defense counsel objections to the appointment process, the USAQ proposed au addendum to the Agreement (0 provide for the osc of an independent third party selector. As 1 recall this matter, before | had any knowledge of defense counsel objections. | sea sponte pruposed the Addendum to Mr. L.ctkowitz at an October meeting in Pat Beach, | did this in an attempt to avoid what | foresaw would likely be a litigious sclection process It was only after | proposed thes change that Mr. Lefkowitz raised with me his enumerated concerns 7 Section 2255 provides that: “Jajny person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violation of [enumerated sections _ of Tule FR] and who snflers personal injury as a result of such violation imery suc At any appropriate United States Diswrict Court and shall recover the actual damages such person sustams and the Cost of the sunt, sachuduns reasonable aftomey's fee.” EFTA00178944

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

BAGvULIG veriue of Title 18 in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, provided that the Mr. Epstem satisfies three gencral [cderal interests: (J) that Mr. Epstein plead guilty to a “registerable™ state ollense, (>) that this state plea melude a binding, recommendation for a sulficicat tern of aprisonnent, amd (3) that the Agrcement not harm the interests of lus victims With this in mind, [ have considered defense counsel arguments regarding the Section 2295 portions of the Agreement. As! previously observed, our intent has been to place the victims in the sume position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial No more, 10 less From our mecting, it appears that the defense agrees that thes was the intent During the course of negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Paragraphs 7 and &, which as I wrote previously. appear far from simple to understand. 1 would thus propose that we solve our disagreements over interpretations by saying, precisely what we mean, ina simple fashion. | would replace Parapraphs / and & with the following language: “Any person, who while a minor, was 4 victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same nphts to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein been irted tederally and convicted ofan enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing Uns paragraph, the United States shall provide Mr. Lpstcin’s atlorneys with a list of individuals whom u was prepared to name man Indictment as viclims of an cnumerated offense hy Mr. Epstcm Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdeus wv any it plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the partics to place these identified victims im the same position as they would have been had Mr Epstein been convicted at trial. No more; no less.” Sccond, | would like to address the issuc of victim's rights pursuant fo Section 3771 I understand that the defense objects to the victims being yiven notice of time and place ol Mr Epstein’s state court sentencing hearing. | have reviewed the proposed wet notification letter and the statute. | would note that the United States provided the draft [etter to defense as a courtesy. In addition, First Assistant United States Attorney Sloman already incorporated im the leticr several edits that had been requested by defense counsel. [agree that Section 3771 applies to notice of proceedings and results of investigations of federal crimes.as oppased to the state crime. We intend to provide vietims with notice of the federal resolution, as required by law. We will defer to the discretion of the State Attorney regarding whether he wishes to provide victims with notice of the state proceedings, although we will provide him with the information necessary to do so ifhe wishes. Third, | would like to address the issne raised regarding Florida Statute Sectian 796.03. At our meeting, Professor Dershowitz (ook the position that Mr. Epstein believes that his conduct docs not satisfy the clements of this offense. | lis assertion raises for me substantial concenms. This Olfice will not, and cannot, be a party to an agreement in which Mr. Epstein pleads guilty to an offense that he believes he did not commit. We are considering how best to proceed qjuus EFTA00178945

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

ARR Ue Finally. J would like to address a more general point, Our Agrcement was first September 24", 2007, Pursuant to paragraph 11, Mr. Epstein was 10 use his best efforts to enter lis puilty plea and be sentenced no later than October 26, 2007. As outlined in correspondence between our prosecutors and defense counsel, thus deadline came and went. Our prosecutors reiterated to defense counsel several times their concems regarding delays, and in fact. asked ine several weeks ago to declare the Agreement in breach because of those delays. | resisted that invitation. [share this fact because it is background to my frustration with what appears to be aa | 1" hour appeal, weeks belore the now scheduled January 4" plea date This said, the issues raised are important and must be fully vetted irrespective of Uimeliness concerns, We hope to preserve the January 4" date. J understand that defense counsel shares our desire not to move that appearance and will work with our office to expedite tus process over the next several days. With this in mind, and in the event that defeose counsel nay wish to scck review of our determinations in Washington D.C., U spoke this past Monday with the Assistant Attorney General Fisher, o infarm her of a possible appeal, to ask her to grant the potential request for review, and to in fact review this case in an expedited manner lo attempt lo preserve the January 4" 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 against his wishes, Your client has the right fo proceed to trial, cand he should do so if he believes that be did not commit the clements of the charged offense. | will respond to the pending issues shortly, In the interm, | would ask that you as quickly as possible communicate your position with respect to the sections 2255 and 33711 Sincerely. | 5) R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ce: Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney General +e Assistant U.S. Attorney wuue EFTA00178946

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

District Court and shall recover the actual damages such ‘person sustaras and the cost of the sunt, aclu en, ee od U.S. Departinent of Justice United States Attorney Southern Districs of Florida R ALEXANDER ACOSTA VINE 4#Smees UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Meamu, PL TES (105) 961-9100 | Felephane (105) 310-6442 Facumile December 19, 2007 DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler White Burnett, PA 1395 Brickell Ave, 14" Floor Miaini, FI. 33131 Re: Jeffrey Epstein Dear Ms. Sanchez: L write to follow up on the December 14" meeting between defense counsel and the fpstemn prosecutors, as well as our First Assistant, the Miami FBI Special Agent in Charge and myself! 1 write to you because fam not certain who among the defense team is the appropriate recipient of this letter. L address issues raised by several members of the defense team, and would thus ask that you please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense (cam members. Virst, | would like to address the Section 2255 issue.’ As { stated in my December 4" lever, my understanding is thal the Non-Prosccution Agreement entered into between this Office and Mr. Epstein responds to Mr. Epstein’s desire to reach a global resolution of his state and federal criminal liability. Under this Agreement, this Nistrict has agreed to defer prosecution for cnumerated sections * Over the past nwo weeks, we have received several hundred pages of arguments and exhibus from defense counsel This is not the fyram to respond to the several items raiscd, and our silence should not be interpret as agreement. ! would, however, like lo address one issue. Your December | 1" fetter states that as a result of defense counsel objections to the appointment process, the USAO proposed an addendum to the Agreement 10 provide for the ase ot an independent third party sclector. As 1 recall this mutter, before t had any knowledge of defense counsel objections, | sua sponte proposed the Addendum to Mr, Lctkowitz at an October meeting it Paty Beach, | did this in an attempt to avoid what | foresaw would likcly be a litigious sclection process Ih was only after | proposed thes change that Mr. Lefkowitz raised with me his enumerated concems 2 Section 2255 provides that: “[ajay person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violation of [enumerated sections of Title [8] and who suflers personal injury as a result of such violation. may suc nL any appropriate Unoued States reasonable anorncy’s fee.” muue EFTA00178947

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

AVe4e AAA VEY vey UEaY BACCUALYE urrivug stein satisfies of Title 18 in favor of prosceution by the State of Florida, provided that the Mr. three gencral federal interests: (J) that Mr. Epstein plead guilty to a “registerable™ state offense. (2) that this state plea include a binding, recommendation fora sufficient term of imprisonment, and (3) that the Agreement not harm the interests of his victims With this in mind, I have considered defense counsel arguments regarding the Section 2295 portions of the Agrecment. As | previously observed, our intent has been to place the victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at tral No more, 10 less. rom our mecting, it appears that the defense ageces that this was the intent Dunng the course of negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Paragraphs 7 and 8, which as [wrote previously, appear far from simple to understand. | would thus propose that we solve our disagreements over interpretations by saying precisely what we mean, ina simple fashion. | would replace Paragraphs 7 and & with the following language: “Any person, who while a minor, was 4 victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein been tried federally and convicted ofan enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing thts paragraph. the United States shall provide Mr. Epstcin’s attorneys with a list of individuals whont ut was prepared to name man Indictment as victims of an cnumerated offense by Mr. Epstein Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining, which evidentiary burdeus iv any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider thal it is the intent of the parties to place these identificd victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstemn been convicted at trial. No more; no less.” Second, 1 would like (o address the issue of victim's rights pursuant fo Section 3771 1 understand that the defense objects to the victims being given notice of time and place ol Mr Epstein’s state court sentencing hearing. | have reviewed the proposed victim notification letter and the statute. | would note thal the United States provided the draft letter (to defense as a courtesy. In addition, First Assistant United States Attorney Sloman already incorporated in the letter several edits that had been requested by defense counsel. [ agree that Section 377! applics to notice of proceedings and results of investigations of federal crimes as opposed to the state crime. We imend to provide victims with notice of the federal resolution, as required by law, We will defer to the discretion of the State Atorney regarding whether he wishes to provide victims with notice of the state procecdings, although we will provide him with the information necessary to do so if he wishes. Third, | would like to address the issue raised regarding Florida Statute Section 796 OF. At our meeting, Professor Dershowitz (ook the position that Mr. Epstcin believes that his conduct docs not satisfy the clements of this offense. His assertion raises for me substantial concerns This Ollice will not, and cannot, be a party fo an agreement in which Mr. Epstein pleads guilty to an offense that he believes he did not commit. We are considering how best to proceed. muUuS EFTA00178948

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

ee ee ar Finally, 1] would like to address a more general point. Our Ayrcement was first signed on September 24", 2007, Pursuant to paragraph 11, Mr. Epstein was to use his best efforts to enter his puilly plea 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. | resisted that invitation. [ share this fact because it is background to my frustration with what appears to be an 11" hour appeal, weeks helore the now scheduled January 4" plea date. This said, the issues raised are important and must be fully vetted irrespective of timeliness concerns. We hope to preserve the January 4" date. TL 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 scck review of our determinations in Washington D.C., | spoke this past Monday with the Assistant Atlorney General Fisher, to inform her ofa possible appeal, to ask her to grant the potential request for review, and to in fact review this case in an expedited manner to attempt lo preserve the January 4" plea date, | want to again reiterate that it is not the infendon of this Office ever to force the hand of a defendant to enter into an agreement against his wishes, Your client has the right to procced to trial. and he should do so if he believes that he did not commit the clements of the charged offense. I will respond to the pending issues shortly. In the interim, [ would ask that you communicate your position with respect to the sections 2255 and 3371 issues as quickly as possible. Sincerely. | Mu R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ce: Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney Gencral , First Assistant U.S. Attorney AUSA “ qwuUud EFTA00178949

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

Ae UE muug U.S. Departinent of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida R ALEXANDER ACOSTA YONE 4 Sirees UNITED) STATES ATTORNEY Mer, FLAG! (105) 964-9100 - Telephone (1035) F10-6444 Foctemile December 19, 2007 DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez Fowler White Burnett, PA 1395 Brickell Ave, 14" Floor Miami, FI. 33131 Re. Jeffrey Epstein Dear Ms. Sanchez: L write to follow up on the December 14" meeting between defense counsel and the Epstein prosecutors, as well as our First Assistant, the Miami FBI Special Agent in Charge and myself! 1 write to you because | am not certain who among the defense team is the appropriate recipient of this Ictter. | address issues raised by several members of the defense team, and would thus ask that you please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense (cam members. First, | would like to address the Section 2255 issue.” As { stated ia my December 4™ letter, my understanding is that the Non-Prasecution Agreement entered into between this Office and Mr. Epstein responds to Mr. Epstein’s desire to reach a global resolution of his state and federal criminal liability. Under this Agreement, this District has agreed to defer prosecution for cnumerated scctious * Over the past two weeks. we have received several hundred pages of arguments and exhibits from defense counsel This is not the forum to respond to the several items raised, and our silence should not be interpret as agreement. | would, however, like to address one issue, Your December ! 1 tener states that as a result of defense counsel abjections to the appointment process, the USAO proposed an addendum to the Agreement (0 provide for the axe ot an independent third party sclector. As I recall this matter, before U had any knowledge of defense counsel objections, | sua sponte proposed the Addendum to Mr, Letkowitz at a0 October meeting in Pain Beach. 1 did thes in an antempt to avoid what | foresaw would likely be a litigious selection pracess. It was only after | proposed this change that Mr. Lefkowitz raised with me his caumerated concems. ? Section 2255 provides that: “fajny person who, While a minor, was # victim of « violation of [enumerated Seetions _ of Tule ER} and who sniffers personal injury as a result of such violation may suc mi any appropriate Unned States ” District Court and shall recover the actual damages such'persoa sustams and the cost of the suit, snc lucdunys a reasonable anorney's fee.” EFTA00178950

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

Avo Aw Ane we . vive vane SAGCULAYE Ulriun of Tide 18 in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, provided that the Mr. Epstein satisfies three general [ederal interests: (J) that Mr. Epstein plead guilty toa “registerable™ state offense. (2) that this state plea include a binding, recommendation fora sufficient term of imprisonment, and (3) thal the Agrcement not harm the interests of his victums With this in mind, I have considered defense counsel arguments regarding the Section 2295 portions of the Agrecment. As! previously observed, uur intent has been to place the victims inthe same position as they would have been had Me. Epstein been convicted at tal No more, no less. From our mccting, it appears that the defense ageces that this was the intent During the course of negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Paragraphs 7 and &, which as I wrote previously. appear far from simple to understand. | would thus propose that we solve our disagreements over interpretations by saying preciscly what we mean, ina simple fashion. | would replace Paragraphs 7 and & with the following language: “Any person, who while a minor, was 4 victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Tile 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same rights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein been tried tederally and convicted ofan enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing thts paragraph. the United States shalt provide Mr. Epsiein’s attorneys with a list of individuals whoni it was prepared to name man Indictment as victims of an enumerated offense by Mr. Epstcin Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdeas if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the parties to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstem been convicted al trial. No more; no tess.” Second, | would like to address the issuc of victim's rights pursuant to Section 3771 1 understand that the defense objects to the victims being given notice of time and place of Mr Epstein's state court sentencing hearing. | have reviewed the proposed victim notification leticr and the statute. 1 would note that the United States provided the draft letter to defense as a courtesy. In addition, First Assistant United States Attorney Sloman already incorporated in the letter several edits that had been requested by defense counsel. I agree that Section 3771 applies to notice of proceedings and results of investigations of federal crimes as opposed to the state crime. We intend to provide victims with notice of the fedcral resolution, as required by law, We will defer to the discretion of the State Aiorney regarding whether he wishes to provide victims with notice of the state proceedings, although we will provide him with the information necessary to do so ifhe wishes. Third, | would like to address the issue raised regarding Florida Statute Section 796.03. At our meeting, Professor Dershowitz took the position that Mr. Epstein believes that his conduct docs not satisfy the clements of this offense. His assertion raises for me substantial concems. This Office will not, and cannot, be a party to an agreement in which Mr. Epstein pleads guilty to an offense that he believes he did not commit. We are considering how best to procecd, iw @uus EFTA00178951

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

: te nee ee wee vue eA VE Finally, ] would like to address a more general point. Our Agreement was first signed on September 24", 2007. Pursuant to paragraph 11, Mr. Epstein was to use hes best efforts to enter lis guilty plea and be sentenced no later than October 26,2007. As outlined in correspondence between aur prosecutors and defense counsel, this deadline came and went. Our prosecutors reiterated to defense counsel several times their concems regarding delays, and mm fact, asked ine several weeks ago to declare the Aprecment in breach because of those delays. [ resisted that invitation. | share this fact because it is background to my frustration with what appears to be ao | \" hour appeal, weeks before the now scheduled January a plea date, This said, the issues raised are important and must be fully vetted irrespective of timeliness concerns. We hope to preserve the January 4" date. TL 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 iu the event that defense counsel may wish to seck review of our determinations in Washington D.C, | spoke this past Monday with the Assistant Atlorney General Fisher, to inform her ofa possible appeal, to ask her to grant the potential request for review, and to in fact review this case in an expedited manner to attempt lo preserve the January 4" plea date. J 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 agrecment against his wishes. Your client has the right to proceed to trial. cand he should do so if he believes that he did not commit the clements of the charged offense. I will respond to the pending issues shortly. In the interim, | would ask that you communicate your position with respect (o the sections 2255 and 3371 issues as quickly as possible. Sincerely. } 5 R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ce: Alice Fisher, Assistant Attorney General First Assistant U.S. Attorney AUSA ot wuua EFTA00178952

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

06/30/08 MON 10:18 FAX EXECUTIVE OFFICE 0 @ 02 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida KR ALEXANDER ACOSTA YONE 4 Swees UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Meams PUG! (105) 961-9100. Felephane (109) 10-6449 Facile December 19, 2007 DELIVERY BY FACSIMILE Lilly Ann Sanchez. Fowler White Burnett, PA 1395 Brickell Ave, 14" Floor Miami, PE. 33131 Re: Jeflrey Epstein Dear Ms. Sanchez: L write to follow up on the December [4 meeting between defense counsel and the Rpstein prosecutors, as well as our Kirst Assistant, the Miami FBI Special Agent in Charge and myself! I write to you because | am not certain who among the defense team is (he appropriate recipient of this Ictter, | address issues raised by several members of the defense team, and would thus ask that you please provide a copy of this letter to all appropriate defense (cam members. First, | would like to address the Section 2255 issue.’ As {stated in my December 4" leuer, my understanding is that the Non-Prosccution Agreement entered into between this Office and Mr. Epstein responds to Mr. Epstein’s desire to reach a global resolution of his state and tederal criminal liability. Under this Agreement, this District has agreed to defer prosecution for cnumerated sccuons " Over the past nwo weeks, we have received several hundred pages of arguments and exhibus from defense counsel ‘This is not the forum (© respond to the several items raiscd, and our silence should not be interpret as agreement, | would, however, like to address one issue. Your December ! 1 letter states that as 4 result of defense counsel objections to the appointment process, the USAO proposed an addendum to the Agreement (0 provide for the ase of an independent third party selector. As { recall this matter, before | had any knowledge of delense counsel objections, | sua sponte proposed the Addendum to Mr, Lctkowit2 at an October meeting 1 Pal Beach, 1 id thes in an artempt to avoid what | foresaw would likcly be a liugious selection process Iwas only uffer | proposed this change that Mr. Lefkowitz raised with me his enumerated concems ? Section 2255 provides that: “[ajny person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violalion of (enumerated sections of Tule 18} and who suflers personal injury as a result of such violation, imay suc in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such persoa sustams and the cost of the sunt, includ 3 reasonable artorney’s fee.” EFTA00178953

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

06/30/08 MON 10:19 FAX EXECUTIVE OFFICE of Title 18 in favor of proscention by the State of Florida, provided that the Mr. Epstem satisfies three general [ederal interests: (J) that Mr. Epstein plead guilty to a “pegisterable™ state offense. (2) that this state plea include a binding, recommendation fora sufficient term of mprisoament, and (3) thal the Agreement not harm the interests of lis victims With this in mind, I have considered defense counsel arguments regarding the Seetion 2295 portions of the Agreement. As! previously observed, our intent has bect to place the victims inthe same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial No more, 10 less From our meeting, it appears that the defense agrees that (his was the intent During the course of negotiations that intent was reduced to writing in Paragraphs 7 and 8, which as 1 wrote presiously. appear far from simple to understand, | would thus propose that we solve our disagreements over interpretations by saying, precisely what we mean, inasimple fashion. | would replace Paragraphs 7 and & with the following language: “Any person, who while a minor, was @ Victim of a violation of an offense enumerated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 2255, will have the same nights to proceed under Section 2255 as she would have had, if Mr. Epstein been tried federally and convicted ofan enumerated offense. For purposes of implementing, thts paragraph. the United States shalt provide Mr. Lipsicin’s atorneys with a list of individuals whons it was prepared to name man Indictmemt as victims of an cnumerated offense by Mr. Epstein Any judicial authority interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it is the intent of the partics to place these identified victims in the same position as they would have been had Mr. Epstein been convicted at trial, No more; no less.” Second, | would like to address the issue of victim's rights pursuant fo Section 37711 understand that the defense objects to the victims being given notice of time and place ol Mr Epstein’s state court sentencing hearing. | have reviewed the proposed victim notification letcr and the statute. | would note that the United States provided the draft Ictter to defense as a courtesy. [In addition, First Assistant United States Attorney Sloman already incorporated im the letter several edits that had been requested by defense counsel. [ agree that Section 3771 applies to notice of proceedings and results of investigations of federal crimes as opposed lo the state crime. We intend to provide victims with notice of the federal resolution, as required by law, We will defer to the discretion of the State Atorney regarding whether he wishes to provide victims with notice of the state proceedings, although we will provide him with the information necessary to do so if he wishes. Third, | would like to address the issue raised regarding Florida Statute Section 796.03. At our meeting, Professor Dershowitz took the position that Mr. Epstcin believes that his conduct does not satisfy the clements of this offense. His assertion raises for me substantial concerns This Office will not, and cannot, be a party fo an agrcementin which Mr. Epstcin pleads guilty to an offense that he believes he did not commit, We are considering how best to proceed mw oo3 EFTA00178954

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

06/30/08 MON 10:19 FAX Hina EXECUTIVE OFFICE Finally, | would like to address a more general point. Our Agrcement was first signed on September 24". 2007. Pursuant to paragraph 11, Mr, Epstein was to use hes best efforts to enter lis 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. Our prosecutors retterated to defense counsel several times their concems regarding delays, and in fact. asked me several weeks ago to declare the Agrecment in breach because of those delays. | resisted that invitation, [ 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 4™ plea date. This said, the issues raised are important and must be (ully vetted irrespective of timeliness concerns. We hope to preserve the January 4" date. Lunderstand 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 ia the event that defense counsel niay wish to scck review of our determinations in Washington D.C., | spoke this past Monday with the Assistant Atlorney General Fisher, to inform her ofa possible appeal, to ask her to grant the potential request for review, and to in fact review this case in an expedited manner lo attempt lo preserve the January 4" plea date. J want to again rciterate that it ts not the intention of this Office ever to force 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 clements of the charged offense. J will respond to the pending issues shortly, In the interim, { would ask that you communicate your position with respect (o the secuions 2255 and 3371 issues as quickly as possible. Sincerely, | 5 R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ce: Alice Fisher, Assistant Atorney Gencral , First Assistant U.S. Attorney AUSA “ oo4 EFTA00178955

--=PAGE_BREAK=--

06/30/08 MON 10:18 FAX EXECUTIVE OFFICE @oo1 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of Florida UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 99 NE 4'" STREET MIAMI, FLORIDA 33132-2111 Jeffrey H. Sloman First Assistant U.S. Attorney Cyndee Campos Staff Assistant fax FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET DATE: June 30, 2008 o06lcUruAaA FAX NUMBER: PF SUBJECT: Epstein NUMBER OF PAGES, INCLUDING THIS PAGE: 4 Message/Comments: This facsimile contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended only for the use of the Addressve(s) named above. Ifyou are not the intended recipient of this facsimile, or the employec or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disscmination or coping of this facsimile is strictly prohibited. If you have reccived this facsimile in error, please immediately notify us by tclephone and return the original facsimile to us at the above address via the U.S, Postal Service. Thank you. EFTA00178956