EFTA00191264
Dataset 9 · 132 pages · 16.7 MB · 38,230 words
This file has been modified on the DOJ website (-11,364 bytes). View all modifications
Cite this document
EFTA00191264, U.S. Department of Justice, Epstein Files release (Dataset 9). Primary source: https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00191264.pdf. Retrieved via Epstein Files Transparency Act Resources, https://tommycarstensen.com/epstein/data/documents/set9/00191/EFTA00191264.html.
Extracted Images (132) #
Extracted Text #
This text was extracted automatically from the scanned pages and may contain errors. Check any quotation against the original scan above or the source document.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 I. UNITED STATES JOINT STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS The parties hereby stipulate and agree that the following facts are not in dispute and may be accepted as true: 1. Between about 2001 and 2006, defendant Jeffrey Epstein (a—billienaire—with—signifteant politieal-eenneetiens)-sexually-abusedinere-than-40 enticed into prostitution minor girls at his mansion in West Palm Beach, Florida, and elsewhere. Among the girls he sexually sed so enticed were Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2. Because Epstein, through others, used a means of interstate commerce and knowingly traveled in interstate commerce to engage in this conduct, te-abuse-Jane-Dee-#4-en43ane-Dee-#2-(and-the-ether-vietims), he committed violations of federal law, specifically repeated violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2422. 2. In 2006, at the request of the Palm Beach Police Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") opened an investigation into allegations that Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") and his personal assistants had used facilities of interstate commerce to induce young girls between the ages of thirteen and seventeen to engage in prostitution, among other offenses. The case was presented to the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, which accepted the case for investigation. The Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office was EFTA00191264 also investigating the-ease Epstein. See Declaration of Bradley J. Edwards, Esq. at ¶¶ 1-2 (hereinafter "Edwards Declaration"). The FBI determined that both Jane Doe 111 and Jane Doe 112 were ictims of aexual 025auh6 by-Epstein-while-they-were-flinierS-iteginning-when-thest-wete-apprenimately-faufteen-years-ef age-and-apprenintately-thifteen-years-efage-respeetivelyrEdwards-1)eelaratien-at-11-2, 4. On about June 7, 2007, FBI agents hand-delivered to Jane Doe #1 a standard-G-V-RA-victim notification letter. See Edwards Declaration, Exhibit "A." The notification promises that the Justice Department would makes its "best efforts" to protect Jane Doe #1's rights, including "[tjhe reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case" and "to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving . . . plea . . . ." The notification further explained that "[a]t this time, your case is under investigation." That notification meant that the FBI had identified Jane Doe #1 as a potential victim of a federal offense. and-as-senteene-preteeted-by-the-GVRA: 5. On about August 11, 2007, Jane Doe #2 received a standard CVRA victim notification letter. See Edwards Declaration, Exhibit "B." The notification promised that the Justice Department would makes its "best efforts" to protect Jane Doe #2's rights, including "[t]he reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the United States in the case" and "to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving . . . plea ...." The notification further explained that "[a]t this time, your case is under investigation." That notification meant that the FBI had identified Jane Doe #2 as a potential victim of a federal offense. aftd-as-semeene-proteeted-by the CVRA. 6. Early-in During the investigation, the FBI agents and the Assistant U.S. Attorney had-several meetinga met with Jane Doe #1. Jane Doe #2 was represented by counsel that was paid for by EFTA00191265 the criminal target Epstein and, accordingly, all contact was made through that attorney. Jane Doe #2 was openly hostile to the investigation, and told investigators that she was not a victim of any offense, that Epstein was an "awesome man," and that she would consider marrying Epstein. Jane Doe #2 actively avoided law enforcement's attempts to secure her cooperation with the investigation and contacted other potential witnesses and victims to advise them against cooperating with the authorities. Edwards Declaration at ¶ 5. 7. In and around September 2007, plea discussions took place between Jeffrey Epstein, represented by numerous attorneys (including lead criminal defense counsel Jay Leflcowitz), and the U.S. Attorney's office for the Southern District of Florida.,] reptesentect-pciffier-ily-by Assistent-U7SrAttemey-ArMaFie--WHefefier-ae-plea-diseussiens-genecally-begen-from-Ihe premise-that-Bpstein-weekl-plead-guilty-et-least-ene-federal-felefty-effense-suFfeunding-his-sexual tissaults-ef-mere-than-40-miner-girls. Frem-ther-er the-numereus-elefense-attecneys-pfegressively uegetiated—rnere—favemble—prea—lems—se—thet—gpsteiii—weuld—tiltimetely—plead These plea negotiations eventually resulted in Epstein pleading guilty to enly two state court felony offenses with a recommendation of 18 months' imprisonment. end-would-serve-only-emu:4y Meny-ef-the-negetietiens-Eife-refleetefl-in-e-mails-between-Leflte lat Gepies Parts of the correspondence are attached as Exhibit J to the Edwards Declaration accompanying this filing (hereinafter cited as "U.S. Attorney's Correspondence" and referenced by Bates number stamp).' Because Epstein has moved to keep these documents from the public, they are at this time filed under seal with the Court. Threugh-ditigeot-effects7-e- Counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 received copies of half of the e- mail correspondence (the half reflecting Villafatta's communications to defense counsel) via discovery requests served upon counsel for Epstein in connection with Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's civil suits against Epstein on about June 30, 2010. See Edwards Declaration at ¶¶20-22. EFTA00191266 8. At the time of plea discussions, AUSA Villafana had drafted the-UnSrAttomeyls-Oirme-had an 82-page prosecution memorandum outlining numerous federal sexual offenses committed by Epstein, and had prepared drafted a 53-page indictment. fer-numereus-federal-effenses. U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 4. 9, le-8eptember4007r Assimant-UTS,Attomey-eisrUSM-ArMarie-V-iflafahe7-in-an-effert-te aveld—preseeuting—Epsteint—fer—Ws—rmmereus—sexual—effenses—against—ohildrenr prepesed—te Epstein's attorneys that rather than plea to any oharges relating to him molesting children, Epstein—sheukl—Mstead-plead-to-a-single-assaul4-eharge-invetving-a-telephene-eall-made-b.y Epstein-kvhilerhe-was-en-his-privatejetrifanring-the-telephene-eal41-Epstein-ymmed-his-persenal assistentr besley-Greffragainst-turning-ever-doeuments-and-eleerrenie-evidenee-respensive-te-a subpeena-issued-by-a-federal-grend--jury-iti-the-Seuthern-Distriet-ef--Flerida—inmestigating Eirsteinls-sen-offensesrU7SrAttemeyls-Cerrespondenee-M-497-587 7 The-eerrespondenee-alse-shows-that-AUSA-Wilatana-was-Mterested-in-finding-a-place-te eonelude-a-plea-bargain-that-weuld-effeetively-keerthe-yietims-from-leaming-what-,was haPpening- througil- the-Pressrghea ftil- lo-flefense-oounsel-0411-an- ' avelE1-the telephone-ealirlf-he-was-in-Mimi-Dade-Getinty-at-the-timerthen-l-ean-file-Me-eherge-in4he Distriet-GOUn-in-Miemir whieli-will-hopefully-mli-the-press-oeverage-signifteantly Atterneyls-Gerrespondenee-M-29,M5rVilktfaria-was-aware-that-most-of--the-vietims-ef-Epstein7 including Jane Doe //l and Jane Doe 112, resided outside the Miami area. On about September 24, 2007, Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafaha sent an e-mail to Jay Lefkowitz, criminal defense counsel for Epstein, regarding the agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit Dae-to-the-eonfidentiality-etaose-in-the-Agreentea4T EFTA00191267 the—e-moil—stetedi—that—the—Govemment—ond—Epstein1/2 —eeunsel—weekl—negettete—betwe ' en thesetyes-abeet-whot-infecmakien-weuld-be4iselesed-te-the-vietims-about-the-agreenienu T-haftk-yeur Joy,--1-have-feewaFded-your-inessage-enly-te-Mex-fAeostqr Andy7 and-Rolandri-denit-antleipate-it-geing-any-fuither-than-thatrWhen-l-reeeive-the efiginalsr I-will-sign-and-retutmene-eepy-te-your-The-ether-will-be-pleeed-in-the ease-Cder whieh-will-be-kept-eenfulential-sinee-i4-also-eontoifis-idenWng informatien-about-the-gifis7 When-we-refteti-an-agreement-abeut-the-atteme representotive-fer-the-githr we ean-diweues.-what-I-ean4611-him-and-fhe-giris-ebew-the-aretweettirI4new-that Andrpremised-Ghief--Reiter-an-update-when-a-resehuien-was-aeltieved Retande-is-eftilingrbut-Relande-lenews-ne4-te-tell-Ghief--Reiter-about-the-money isuo, just about what crimes Mr. Epstein is pleading guilty to and the amount of time-that-has-been-agreed-terRelantionulso-is-felling-ChiefReiier-not4O-diselose the-eufeente-fe-anyene 4-2, On about September 25, 2007, AUSA Villafafia sent an e-mail to Lefkowitz, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit stating.-11And-ean-we-itaye-a-eenferenee-edi-te-disesss what-I-may-diselese-to,the-gek-regarding-the-agreemenWl-U:SrAnemeyls-Cerrespondenee at-1-56: 13. On about September 26, 2007, AUSA. Villafafia sent an e-mail to Lefkowitz, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit in-whielt-she-etatedailiay—Can-you-give-me-a-eall at-564-209--Enentl-this-mentifte-1-am-nweting-widt-the-agents-and-want-to-give-them4heir marching orders regarding what they can tell the girls." U.S. Attorneys Correspondence at 359. The reasonable inference is that the "marching orders" agreed to between the Government and Epsteinls-tiefense-eounsel-was-that-ne-mention-weuld-be-made-octhe-ROli-pfeseeutiewegreement between-the-U,SrAttertieyls-Gfflee-anii-Epsteiur as-fie-subsequen4-inention-was-made-to-the vietims-of-the-nen-pcoseeutien-agreement, EFTA00191268 -14 On about September 27, 2007, Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafafia sent an e-mail to Leflcowitz regarding an attorney who was under discussion to be a representative of victims of Epstein civil litigation, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit revealed te-an-atterney-filert-geariz-)r vihe-was-uader-4isettssien-te-be-a-representative-ef-vietims-ef Epstein-ls--sexeal-abuse-in-eivi-l-Litigatienr that-the-gevemmerd-was-in-the-preeess-ef-reaehing-a nen-pfeseeulien-agreemeni-with-Epstein- rli-e-Fflaikeenftrming-these-diselosures-stated iertls firm-has-rai-sed-a-nember-ef-geed-gnestiens-about-hew-theaf0-geitig-te-tet-pai l.k& Atterneyls-Cerrespendenee-at-1-6-1,-The-e-maii--went-en-te-state÷-sl-teldat-that-as-part-ef-Otlf agreement-we-fthe-federal-gevemment)-are-net-gekt-te-indiet-MFrEwsteinr but-give-him-afl-idea ef--the-ehaFges-that-we-had-planred-te-lyring-as-related-te-1-8-1 e-mail-alse aske4pennission from Epstein's counsel to send to Ooariz a copy of pans of the plea agreement: t2With-respeet-le-questien-2-4a-questien-frem-Geariz-regardieg*w}hen-v#111-14-be-pessible-te-see the-plea-agfeement-se-that-we-understand-exaetly-what-Epstein-eeneedes-te-in e 1-have-yeur-permissien-te-send-Bert-jest-that-seetien-ef-the-plea-agreement-that-appties-te-the demages-etaims-(4-weetd-reeemmend-sentting-paragraphs-7-threugh-1070r-at-least-7-and-8) 4-5 4ali-abeet- SePlember-2-57400.7r AS14,arA- ftfakt-sent-a-lettec-te4ey-lefkewitz--titat stated: in which she suggested that-the victims should be represemed by someone who was not an-expeFieneed-persenal-injery-attemey=tThey-fthe-ether-la neler-eensideratienf very-geed-persenal-Miury-lawyersr but-l-have-eeneerns-abest-whether-th e-an-inherent tensien-beeaue-they-may-feel-that-they-might-make-mere-meney,n--if-they-preeeed-entsitte-the terns-of the pela agreement. (Sorry 1-jual-have-a-bies-against-ptaintiffsz-atterneysel.687 Attorney's Correspondence at 157. Villafana continued to push Oeariz as the best choice, in EFTA00191269 beeause4t-weukl-redttee-publiei ne-niee4hing-about-Beft-feeafi*is-that-he4s-in-Miatni where-teheF-has-beea-almest-ne-eeverage-ef-the-eas idr 16. hi-a--letter-later-seftt-by-Jay-Lefkewitz--te-the-U,SrAuemey-fer-the-Seuihem-giStfie4-of Fie&lar Lefkewitz-s4a+e44hat-ASIM-V-iBafafla-MEIAtssitiueusl dden-fr-eni-hkn4he-faet-that Bert--Geatie-vms-a-friend-ef-V-illaftalals-beyftiewirTr1787-Aueseyls-Gerfeepenflenee-at-2677 Lefkowitz also stated that Villafafta had misleadingly used the term "friend" rather than the more aseufate-tenfflbeyfrienc122-te-41eseFibe-whe-hatl-reeeramen*led-Oeafizr-Mrat468rbefkowita ftwther-state4-the-Wllafafiafrrbeyfr-ientl-had-a-busiaess-relatieaship-witli-Oeerie-autl-that-the beyfFiencl-weukl-have-anausielly-benekted-from-the-preaumably-luerative-refeypal-ef-sexual assauit-eeses-againet-Epstein-te-gear-4rOn—Deeember-1-3;-200-71-WIlefaria-wrete-a-letter-te Lefleawki-te-eleny-these-aeeusatiensr -the-letter7-Villefatia-stateelt itu-sutzprised-by-yektr allegatiens-regarigrig-my-rele-beeause-l-thettght-that-we-Ilad-wecked-veFy-well-tegether-ie reseiving-this4ispeteri-elseram-surpr-isecl-beeaese-1-feel-that-1-bent-ever-backwarils-te-keep-in mind4he-effeet-that-the-agreement-weukl-have-en-MfrEpstein-and-te-make-sttre4hat-ytu-(entl-he) unclersteed-the-repereussiens-ef-the-agfeemeribt--kir 17. On about September 24, 2007, Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office reached an agreement whereby the United States would defer federal prosecution in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida. Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office accordingly entered into a "Non- Prosecution Agreement" (NPA) reflecting their agreement. Most-signiffeentlyr t The NPA gave Epstein a promise that he would not be prosecuted for a series of federal felony offenses involving the enticement into prostitution of a large number of minor girls. invoking-his seeual-abuse-ef-tnefe-thau-30-Fainer--girith The NPA instead allowed Epstein to plead guilty to two state felony offenses for solicitation of prostitution and procurement of minors for EFTA00191270 prostitution. The NPA also set up a procedure whereby a victim of Epstein's sexual abuse could obtain an attorney representative to proceed with a civil claim against Epstein, provided that the victim agreed to proceed exclusively under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 (iTe7 which provided that the-each victim would recover agreed-to-seek no mere less than $150,000 in damages against Epstein — an amount that Epstein argued later was limited to no more than $50,000). See Edwards Declaration, Exhibit "C" (copy of the non-prosecution agreement). The agreement was signed by Epstein and his legal counsel, as well as the U.S. Attorney's Office, on about September 24, 2007. 18. A provision in the non-prosecution agreement made the agreement confidential secret. In particular, the agreement stated: "The parties anticipate that this agreement will not be made part of any public record. If the United States receives a Freedom of Information Act request or any compulsory process commanding the disclosure of the agreement, it will provide notice to Epstein before making the disclosure." Potenter-ing-into-suell-a-eanctdentiality-agreement, the 14-&-Attepneyls-Offiee-put-itself-M-a-pesitien-thet-Fretifying-the-er-ime-vietims-fineluding--Jane Doe ill and June Doe #2) of the non prosecution agreement would violate terms of the agreement—speeifteelly-the-eaufrdentiality-proyision,—AeeeFdiuglyr frem-September-24r 200-7 threugh-at-least-June-2008—a-period-of-meFe4hafFnifte-menths—the-U4-Artteratee-did not notify any of thc victims of the existence of the non prosecution agreement. 497 A reazonable inference from the evidence is that the U.S. Attorney's Office wanted the nea-meseemieri-agreement-kepr-frem-pulalie-view-beeause-ef-the-iniense-publie-eritieism-Mat would-have resulted from allowing a politically connected billionaire who had sexually abused more than 10 minor girls to escape from federal procccution with only a county court jail EFTA00191271 sentenee-oftel-beeause-ef-the-pessibility-that4he-vieties-eoulel-have-ebjeeted-te-the-agreement-io eeurt-and-preventeil-its-eensurnmatierh 20. The Non-Prosecution Agreement that had been entered into between the U.S. Attorney's Office and Epstein was subsequently modified by an October 2007 Addendum and a December 19, 2007, letter from the U.S. Attorney to Attorney Lilly Ann Sanchez. See Supplemental Declaration of A. Marie Villafafia, doe. #35, at 1; U.S. Attorney's Correspondence at 234-37. The—‘65,4atemeyss—Offiee-414--rtet-ootify-ony-ef-the-viatims-ef--the-existenee-efr-theee metlifteatiens-of-the-agreement-threogli-at-leost4ofte4008—a-peried-of-RIOre-than-si*-mooths7 On about August 14, 2008, Epstein's defense counsel told the U.S. Attorney's Office that they did not consider the December 19, 2007, letter to be operative. Id. 21. In October 2007, shortly after the initial plea agreement was signed, Jane Doe #1 was contacted to be advised regarding the resolution of the investigation. On October 26, 2007, Special Agents E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and Jason Richards met in person with Jane Doe #1. The Special Agents explained that Epstein would plead guilty to state charges, he would be required to register as a sex offender for life, and he had made certain concessions related to the payment of damages to the victims, including Jane Doe #1. During this meeting, the agents explained that this would end the federal investigation of the case and no federal charges would be tiled. the-Speeiel-Agents-41€1-net-explain-thet-an-agreement-hed-alfeaely-been-signed-thet preeluile€1-any-proseetitierref--Epotein-fer-federal-ehorges-The-agents-eoukl-oot-have-revealefl this pan of the non prosecution agroement without violating the terms of the non prosecution agFeementr-Whet-her-the-ogenis-themselves4a4-been--incortned-ef--the-exietenee-ef-the-ften- preseeution-agreement-hy-the-LI47-Menwyls-Offiee-is-net-eertaiorReeause-the-plea-agreetnent EFTA00191272 had already been reached with Epstein, (ho agents made no attempt to secure Jane Doe ill's view on-the-preposed-resehitien-ef-the-easerEdwafds-Deelaratien-a4-11--7 22. Jane Doe # l's perception of the explanation provided by the Special Agents was that only the State part of the Epstein investigation had been resolved, and that the federal investigation would continue, possibly leading to a federal prosecution. Edwards Declaration at ¶ 8. a On about November 27, 2007, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeff Sloman sent an e-mail to Jay Lefkowitz, defense counsel for Epstein, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit The e-mail-statedt—that-the-1478,Atiemeyls-Offtee-lieel-an-ebligatieft-te-netify4he-vietims-about-the plea-area:korai The-Umile4-Siates4as-e-siesiery-obligatienasikeler-411-Aet-of-3-004)49-nefifr theviefims-oftheamieipated-upeemingevenm-and-their-righie-asseeitried-with-the agreenteni-entered-inte-by-she-Uniied-StaiesLimet-Alrr Tomeffew-vAll-make-one-foll-week-sinee-yea-were-fewnefirnetified-ef-the seleetion,l-must-insist-that-the-vetting-preeess-eeme-te-on-enelrTheteferer unless yeu-previde-wie-with-a-goed-faith-ebjeetien-te-Judgeneleetien-fas-speeiel master-foc-seleeting-legal-eounsol-fer-vietito-pocsolog-olaims-agaiost-Epsteinl-by GOB—temerrewr Nevember—a8r 2007r 1—will—autherize—the—rietifieatieti—ef—the vietiwisT,Should-teti-give-ine-the-ge-head-en-iktdhum4-aad-Jesetthsbefg-seleetien by-GOB-temoffewr i-%411-simoltarteeusly-sead-yeu-a4raft-ef-the-lefterr ftetify-thearietims-by-letter-after-GOB-Thursdayl-Nevember-29.ffi UnSrAttemeyls-Gefrespendenee-at-2-5-5-(emphasis-rearrangeel* 24. On about November 29, 2007, Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafafia sent a draft of a crime victim notification letter to Jay Lefkowitz, defense counsel for Jeffrey Epstein. The notification letter explained: "I am writing to inform you that the federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein has been completed, and Mr. Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office have reached an agreement containing the following terms . . .." The letter then went on to explain that Epstein would plead guilty to two state offenses and receive an 18 month sentence. The-lefter-did-fiet expleiw-that-res-part-ef-the-agreemeot-witli-Epsteiartheaistiee-Depaftffient-liacl-previeusiy-agreeel EFTA00191273 ftet-te-preseente-EpsieMier-any-ef-the-numereus-federal-offenses-that-had-been-eemmittedr Attemeyls-C-eFrespendenee-at-2-56-597 25. Apparently-beeause-ef-eeneems-frern-SpsteinIs-atterneys; Because Epstein's attorneys sought higher review of the enforceability of the Non-Prosecution Agreement, the U.S. Attorney's Office never sent the proposed victim notification letter discussed in the previous paragraph to the victims. Instead, a misleading letter stating that the case was "currently under investigation" (described below) was sent in January 2008 and May 2008. At-ne4inie-before reaehing-nen-proseeutien-agmement-did-the-Justiee-Deparnnent-emitast-any-vistimsr including fer-example-Jane-Dee44-r abeut-their-views-en4he-nen-preseeutiem 26. On about December 6, 2007, Jeffrey H. Sloman, First Assistant U.S. Attorney sent a letter to Jay Lefkowitz, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit neting-the ttemeyie EpsteM-Ple-letter-stated+ Fiftally;-let-tne-address-yeur-objeetions-te-the-draft-Wetim-Netifieatien-6etier: 31-eu-wfite-that-yeu-den4-widerstand-the-basis-fer--the-Offieers-betief--that-it-is appremiate-te-netify-the-vietimsrFursuent-te-theslustiee-fer-A11-Ast-ef-2004 fanother-name-frem-the- Fivae-vietims-ffe-entitled-te -right-te reasonabler aeenrater and-timely-netiee-of-any-publie-mtuft-preeeeding, invelving-the-efimeLand-the-tright-not-te-be-exeludetl-frem-any-sueli-publie-eourt pmeeeding,--L--1-8-1.17,344-3-77-1-(02)-86-(3),Seetion-37-74-alse-eemmands that empleyees-af-the-DepaFtment-ef-Jestiee engaged-in-the-deteetieni investigatienr er--preseentien-ef-erime-shall-mke-their-best-effects-te-see-Mat erime-vietims-Ofe-netified-afr anel-aeeerdedr the-Fights-deseribed-in-subeetien-(*)? 18 U.S.C. § 3771(o)(1). . . . Qur-Nenaeseention-Agreement-resolves-the-federal-investigatien-by-allewing MirEpstein-te-plead4e-a-state-effenserThe-viefints-ide reugh-thefetieral invesiigatien-shefeld-be-apprepplavely-infermetir and-eur-Nen-Preseeutien Agreement-dees--mst-require-the-417SrAttemeyls-Offiee-te-ferege-its-legal ebligatieny IrlArroMerneyls-Gerrespandenee-m-1-94-92-(emphasis-added)7 EFTA00191274 27. Despite-this-reeegnitien-ef--iis-ebligolion-te-keep-vietin apprepriately-infemedabout-the nen-pfeseeetien-egFeementr the-U7SrAneFney1/2 -Offiee-did-net-fellew-threugtrand-i.nfortn-the irieties-ef-the-nen-preseetnien-agreement,To4he-oentfafyr asAiseussed-belewr it-eentineed-to tell-the*ietitne-that-the-ease-was-aunder-investigationMmilwar-do-Deoloratiewat-s-4-and41-1-2, 28. On December 13, 2007, A. Marie Villafafia sent a letter to Jay Lefkowitz, defense counsel for Epstein„ a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit _.rebutting-ehafges-that had-apporently-been-mde-agoinst-her-by-the-Epstein-defenser-The-letter-stated-thet-a-feder-ol indietment-against-Epsteinwas-pestponed-fer-mare-than-fwe-nienths-te-all yeu-and-Mf: Epsteinls-ether-attevneys-te-make-presentatiens-te-the-Offiee-te-eonvimee-the-Qtrtee-net-te preseeutell'--The-letter-alse-reeounted-that -You-and-l-spent-lieurs-negotioting-the-tems-[ef-the fieli-preseestien-agreenclentir ineleding-when-te-use=aLmemus=the=and-etheriffrinetieerWhen you-and-i-eould-net-reoeh-agreenientr yeu-repeotedirwent-ever-my-Ileadr invelving-Messr* beefier MeneheIr Siontanr and-Aeoste-i.n-the-negetiatiens-at-vocieus-timeo." U.S. Attorney's Gerrespendenee-at-2697 20,The-Deeember—Par 2007,-letier—alse-mveols-that-the-Jostiee-Deportment-stepped-coaking vietim-netifieations-beeause-ef-ebjeetiens-frem-Epsteinis-eFiminal-elefense-eeunseli-2-Three vietims-Viere-netifted-oheftly-after-the-signing-ef--the-Nen-Proseeutionagreement-ef-the-generet teFnis-ef--the-Agreetnefttr--Yote-mieed-objeetiens-ie-ony-vietim-nofifieotiom-ond-no-foNhor nefifiealieeis-were-dene t4temeyls-Gerrespendenee-M-2-70-(eniphasis-added* 30. Following the signing of the Agreement and the modifications thereto, Epstein's performance was delayed while he sought higher. level review within the Department of Justice. See U.S. Attorney's Correspondence passim. EFTA00191275 31. On January 10, 2008, Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 received letters from the FBI advising them that "[tJhis case is currently under investigation. This can be a lengthy process and we request you'd continued patience while we conduct a thorough investigation." See Doc. #14 (attachments 3 and 4 to declaration of A. Marie Villafafla) (emphasis added). The-statement-in the-netifteatien-leuer-wes-falserihe-eese-was-net-ettrrentlyunder-investigatien -the eentrapyr the-ease-had-been-reselved-hy-the-nen-preseeutien-agreement-entered-inte-hy-Epstein and-the-U7SrAttemmis-offiee-diseuesed-previeuslyMereevefr the-FBI-eid-net-netify-Jane-Dee 44-Of4ane-Dee42-thet-a-plea-agreement-Iffid-befm-reaeheil-previeuslyr and-thm-part-ef-the agreement-was-a-nen-preseemien-areement-with-the-U:Srismerney1/2 -Ofriee-fer—the-Seuthem Diewiet-ef-Fleficiar-Edwards-Deelaratien-at-4147 32. Iii-early-2008r Jane-Dee4-1-anclane-Doe402-eame-te-believe-that-efiminalpreseeutiewef Epstein woo extremely important. They also desired to be oonsulted by the FR! and/or other representatives-ef-the-fedmal-gevemment-aheut-the-preseeutien-ec-BpsteinrIn-light-ef-the-lettem that they had received around January 10, they believed that a criminal investigation of-Epstein was on going and that they would be contacted before the federal government reached any final mseimien-ef-that-investigatienrEdwards-Deelaratien-at--11-147 33. On about February 25, 2008, Assistant U.S. Attorney Sloman sent an e-mail to Jay Leflcowitz„ a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit _.Bpsteinls—eriminal—defense eeunselr explaining that the Justice Department's Child Exploitation Obscenity Seotion (CEOS) had-agreeil-te-review-Bpstein1/2 -ehjeetiens-te-the--prepese4-plea-agFeement-that-hed-heen-reaehed with-theWatomeyls-Offiee-fer-the-Seuthem-Diemiet-ef--FlefidarThe-letter-indiested-thah sheuld-GEOS-rejeet-Bpsteiels-objeetiens-te-the‘-agreementr thenMErEpsiein-shall-have-ene week-te-abkle-by-the-teens-and-eenditiens-ef-the-Septembef-24r 200;agFeement-as-amended-by EFTA00191276 lener-freni-Uniteil-Statesatterftey-osteesta-te-Jarheilfltecneys-Geffespentienee-at 290 91. 34. In about April 2008, Jane Doe #1 contacted the FBI because Epstein's counsel was attempting to take her deposition and private investigators were harassing her. Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafana secured pro bono counsel to represent Jane Doe #1. Pro bono counsel was able to assist Jane Doe #1 in avoiding the improper deposition. AUSA Villafaila secured pro bono counsel by contacting Meg Garvin, Esq. of the the National Crime Victims' Law Center in Portland, Oregon, which is based in the Lewis & Clark College of Law. During the call, Ms. Garvin was not advised that a non-prosecution agreement had been reached. 35. On May 30, 2008, another of Mr. Edwards's clients who was recognized as an a potential victim of Epstein victim by the U.S. Attorney's Office, received a letter from the FBI advising her that "fifhis case is currently under investigation. This can be a lengthy process and we request your continued patience while we conduct a thorough investigation." The statement in-the-netifieetien-letter-wee-falser-The-ease-was-net-eurrentlyentler-investigatien te eentretyr-the-ease-hati-been-reselved-by-theiten-preseentien-egreernent-enteced4nte-by-Epstein 36. In mid-June 2008, Mr. Edwards contacted AUSA Villafaha to inform her that he represented Jane Doe #1 and, later, Jane Doe #2. Mr. Edwards asked to meet to provide information about the federal crimes committed by Epstein, hoping to secure a significant federal indictment against Epstein. AUSA Villafruia and Mr. Edwards discussed the possibility of federal charges being filed. At the end of the call, AUSA Villafaula asked Mr. Edwards to send any information that he wanted considered by the U.S. Attorney's Office in determining whether to file federal charges. Because of the confidentiality provision that existed in the plea EFTA00191277 agreememr MirEdwards—was—net—infeemed—that--peevieuslyr in—September-2007r the—LITS, Attemeyls-Offiee-liad-reaehed-on-ageeemen4-net-te-file-federal-ehorgesMfr-Edworels-wes-olse not-infermeel-that-reselution-ef-The-oriminal-rnaner--was-i.mminentrEdworels-Deektratien-alH-3, 37. On Friday, June 27, 2008, at approximately 4:15 p.m., AUSA Villafafia received a copy of Epstein's proposed state plea agreement and learned that the plea was scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Monday, June 30, 2008. AUSA Villafafia and the Palm Beach Police Department attempted to provide notification to victims in the short time that Epstein's counsel had provided. Attorney Edwards was called to provide notice to his clients regarding the hearing. ALISA-Villefafio-did net-tellattecney-Edwaeds-that-the-guilty-pleas-in-state-eeert-would-bring-on-end-to-the-pessibility of-federal-preseoutien-pustrant-te-the-pleo-agfeement,Edwards-Deolamtiem-at—II—Ph AUSA Villafafia strongly encouraged Attorney Edwards and his client to attend and address the Court at sentencing if they so desired. 38. On June 30, 2008, AUSA Villafafla sent an e-mail to Jack Goldberger, criminal defense counsel for Epstein, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit _.that-statedi-ti-Jaek-The FRI-Iles-reeeived--seveml-ettlis-regardiag-theMen-Preseeutien—isrgreemenh--I—de—rlet—knew whethee-the-title-ef-ttte-deooment-was-diselesed-when4he-Agreemem-was-filed-under-sealr but 39. On July 3, 2008, Mr. Edwards sent to AUSA Villafafia a letter. See Affidavit of Bradley J. Edwards, Esq., at 15 (attachment 2). In the letter, Mr. Edwards indicated his client's desire that federal charges be filed against defendant Epstein. In particular, he wrote on behalf of his clients: "We urge the Attorney General and our United States Attorney to consider the fundamental import of the vigorous enforcement of our Federal laws. We urge you to move forward with the traditional indictments and criminal prosecution commensurate with the crimes EFTA00191278 Mr. Epstein has committed, and we further urge you to take the steps necessary to protect our children from this very dangerous sexual predator." When Mr. Edwards wrote this letter, he was still unaware that a non-prosecution agreement had been reached with Epsteini.1 - a-feet-that eentinued-te-be-eeeeealed-fFein-hico-(and-the-vietims)-by-the ttemeyls-Offieer Mr. Edwards first saw a reference to the NPA on or after July 9, 2008, when the Government filed its responsive pleading to Jane Doe's emergency petition. That-pleading-was-the-first-publie mention-ef-the-neit-preseeution-agreement-and-the-fifst-diselesere-to-MirE4wards-(ead-thus-te Jone-Dee-#4-and--Jene-Dee-#2.)-of-the-possible-existeiwe-of-a-nen-proseeutien-agreement, Edwards Declaration at ¶ 15. 40. On July 9, 2008, AUSA Villafafta sent a victim notification to Jane Doe #1 via her attorney, Bradley Edwards. Edwards Declaration, Exhibit "H." That notification contains a written explanation of some of the terms of the agreement between Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office. A MI copy of the terms was not provided. A notification was not provided to Jane Doe #2 because the agreement limited Epstein's liability to victims whom the United States was prepared to name in an indictment. As a result, Jane Doe #2 never received a notification a letter about the agreement. The-rietifieation4id-net-nientieft-tlie-tieti-preseetttieft . Edwards Declaration at ¶ 16. 41. On July 9, 2008, AUSA Villafafta filed a sworn declaration with the Court in connection with the case (doc. #14). The declaration purported to recount limit parts of the non-prosecution agreement and stated that "these provisions were discussed" with several victims, including Jane Doe #1. Id. at 4. 42. On July 11, 2008, the Court held a hearing on Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2's Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Rights. During the hearing, the Government conceded that Jane Doe EFTA00191279 #1 and Jane Doe #2 were "victims" within the meaning of the Crime Victim's Rights Act. Tr. at 14-15. 43. aufhig-theally,-14Alearingr the-Getin-atid-the-pafties-disetissed-the4eet-that-theiaetitien ohould not be treated as an "emergency" petition because there was not any particular rush to Feting-en-kr=Frrat4445,The-GetiFt-further4iseassed-a-need-te4liwfel-a-eemplete-reeer-dr and this-is-geing-te-be-an-issue-thalls geing4e-ge-teAe-Bleventh-Girouitr (sbiti-nla)“be-better-to have-a-eemplete-reeerd-as4e-i,4hat-yeef-pesitien-is-and-the-governmentis-is-ftS4o-kiohat-aetions 4freere4akenl —Anci - l - denItanes .r if-l-have-metigh4nrefmatienr base4-ena4s,V41.Anals-a.ffitlevit er-l-need-additienel-infetmationr—And-beeatise-it-is-fiet-en-emefgeneyr 1-denit-have-teAe somethingieieklyr we-ean-play-iFbfyi-ear-and-niake4his-inte-a-mere-eemplete-reeer44or-the esuct-of-appeats frat4S46,Gewisel4er-Jane-Dee414-and-Jane-Dee4a-e*ftlainedtlir., YOttf-Hener-is-eefreet4n-stating4h€4444s-net-en-emergeney“and44-deestilt-ti.ee4-te-liappen4e4ay7 Andr 1-svill-eenfee-witli-the-goverftment-en-this-an€14f-evi4enee-needs4e4e4rakenr it-Feen)4e taken-at-a4ater-daterit-deesnit-seem-like4hefea,411-be-any-preiudiee-te-anyt-petrt,-Efrem4elayF Trre446,The4teafing-eenetude&Se-P1-let-beth-ef-yea-eeefeeabeet-whether-there-is-aiteed fer-aftyc-additietial-eviflenee-te-be-preseniedr-Let-me4nes.,Lene-way-of-the-etherrWthere4s7well4 sehedule-a-heaFingrif4her-e-isnit-and-)cetrwant-to-submit-seme-additienal-stipu4ated4nfemetienT de4hatr and-then411-14ake-etwe-e.f4his-in-dee-eeurse rrat42,The-C-eaft4heii-adjeufnedr taking the->oietims=petitieniindeeedvisement, 44. The-lch8r764terneyts-effiee-ancl-the-lietime4hen-attempted4e-reaeh-a-stipulated-set-of-faets anderlying4he-easerThe-W787,4.tterneyls-Offtee-sef,a-preposed-set-of-feetss-arid4he-..iietims-sent a-eeuffter-prepesal,Rather--than-respond-te-the-vietims=eetinter-prepesalr hewevecr the-U4, Attemeyls-Office-suddenly-reversed-eetirser(Doer#4V-at4),-On4aly49r 200-8r it-fi4ed-a41etiee EFTA00191280 te-Geuct-Regardint-Absenee-ecNee€14ef-Evidentiafy-Heaping-(deer#1-7)rThe-Geventmem-teek the-position-their beee.use-ne-fetml-eriniinal-eharges-liad-been-fi4ed-in4he4euthem-Distfiet-ef Fierider fte-additienal-evidenee-..,oes-requifed4e4eeide-the-petitien-befere4heCOMIT 45. On—i4ugust-174008r Jane-Dee-#4-and4ane-Dee42-filed-(deer-X1-9)-a-respense4e-the Gevernmentis-aNetieeA—FrF411e-respenser Jane-Dee-iM-and4ane-Dee-ifa-gave-a-prepese4 statement-ef-fasts-suFFeundin the-easerThe-prepese4-statement-ef-feet-was-based-en-the information available to the victims at that time. The proposed statement of facts highlighted the feet-that-the-Geverament-had-signed—a—nen-pfeseetnien—agreement—eentakting—ati—ewess eefffi4entiality-pfeidsienr whieh-prevemed-the-Gevemnien44reni-diselesing-the-agfeement-te theni-itn4-eilief-vietiesr4d74it4,The-respense-ake-ne4ed4hat4he-GOtin-had4aken-the-vi.e4m.s! peti4ietruncier-edstisememrThe-respense4unher-neted4hat-the-Gevemment-had-ftet-attempted4e werk-..,#itli-the--,#ietims4e-draft-a411-set-efAindisputed4aels-EtR4-kad4eNsed4he-Jo.ietimsLefferts4e ebtaitl-eleesments-relevant-te-the-easeridrat-9r-Mt Nietims-respense4Ise-requested4hat-the GOUft-direet-the-Geverament-te-eeefef-with4he-Jiietims-regareling-the-Effidisputed4ae4s-ef-the easer ftreduee-the-nefl-preseeutief,i-agfeement-at-issue4n-the-easer and-preduee-an4B1-Repe4-e.f intewiew-,.vitli-Jane-Dee4f1 The,-fesponse-alse-requested-tha4-the-Getlft-en4eFiudgment-fer-the %tietimeLfindintit-yielatiefref-Fights-aml-sehedule-ct-hear4rigethe-appfepfiate-remedyrle/rat-14, 46. Cht-Augum-147-20087the-GOON-hel4-a4eaFing-en4he-ease,—Dering-that-heafiegr the-U$7 Atteme.sas-Offiee-eeneeded=twe-de4eel4eusd-b),-the-eenfi4eRtiatityprevisiefEsuell-thitt-we eeukl-net-velestefilrdiselese-this-nell-preseeutieft-agreement->A4itheut-eetwt-erder-eempel4ing-us te4e-se rrat-87-Tlie-effiee4.6ent-eil-te4urther-eeneede4hat-it-eeeklilet-justiPfrdeprivin.wthe vietievref-the-eppeftunity4e-see4he-agreemen4,4drat-14,The-heafiffgeeneleded-witheut-any sehedule-Of4eadlines-hOintpat4n-plaee, EFTA00191281 47. Ori-Geteber-9r 2008r Bfadley-J,Edwarilsr seunsel-ferane-Dee-#-1-and-Jane-Dee-#2r sent- a letter-to-eoensel-for-the- terneyzs-Offiee-iii--this-ease-aeivising-that-twe-pessibly-false statements-hael-been-made-te-thfrcetift2m-the-July-9th-swom-deeleration-of-ALISA-V4llefarlarigee Oetr9r a048r Letter from Bradley J. Edwards to Marie Villafafia at 1, Edwards Declaration, Atetelvinent -ir-str whi4e—MsrWilefarla—liael—desevibetha—tenn—as-being-part-ef-the-plea agreeinesvith-Epsteiur that-teen-later-beeeme-defauetr itt-least-in-the-view-ef-Epsteie attemeys-Eantl-apparently-seeedesi-te-by-the-thSrAttomeyzs-Offiee)r-Seeendr Msrliitlafefia-had sicid-that-21four-viet-ims-finetuding-kine-Doe-#4-bwere-eenteeted-entl-Mese-previsiens-were diseussede-it-wes•net-olear-what-provisiens-ktad-in-feet-been4iseussed7 48. OrrDeeember-2-2r 200frAtASA-Mar-ieNillafana-frlecl-a-supplementel-affidavi eeireetine the-stetement-inede-in-her-Juty-87-20083-deelerefien-about-ther-terms-of-the-plea-agreement-(dee: tt weer iii-the-Yiew-Epstein=legal-GettftSelr ile-lenger-operativer—The-supplementel—affidavih however, did not clarify what terms of the agreement had been discussed. 49. On April 9, 2009, counsel for Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 sent to the Court in this case (via the PACER system) a notice of a change of law firm affiliation. Doc. #37. 50. hi—approximately—May-2009r eounsekfer—Jene—Dee44—and—Jane—Dee—#2—propeundefl diseoveFy—request-s—in—bech—state—ttafi—fedecal—eivikeases—against—Epsteier seeking—to—obtain eorrespendenee-hetween-Epstein-and-pfeseeutefs-regar4ing-his-piea-agreemem—infoFmatien-that the-6178-.-Attemey2s-Offiee-was-unwillingte-previfle-te-Jene-Dee4-1-and-Jane-Doe-#2,Espstein Fefused-te-preduee-that-infeimatieer anfl-extended-kigation-to-obtain-the-materials-followed, Edwarels-DeelaFation-at4I407 EFTA00191282 51. Beeause-ePthirs-extendekl-iitigetionr Jane-Dee4M-end4ene-Dee42-did-net-have-fteeess-te impeEtem-seFFespendenee-demens4ca4ing-aaAelatien-ef-thelerights-untilame40;404-0r-On-that dayr eeensel-fer-Bpsteifrsent-te-Bredle,“JrEctwardsr Es egal-eaunsel-fer4ene-Dee-#4-an44ene Dee-Of2r appreximateb,--3-58,pagesref-e-ifieil-eerrespendenee-between4is4egal-eennsel-and-the U78,6.44emey1/2 -Offiee4eethe4euthern-Distfiet-ef-Fleride-regarding-the-plea4greement-that-hed beeti-negetiated-betweeel-themr—See-Edwards-Deetaratienr Ailaehment-. ese-e-mitils diseleseel-fer-the-first-time-4he-extreme-ttnd-uftusual-steps-that-lied4een-taken-by-the-Y787 Attemey1/2 -Qffree40-aveid-preseeu“.ng-gpsteiwantl-te-aveid-having-the-y.ietims-in4he-ease-teani abeut—the—mfl--ppeseeutien—agreement—thig—had—been—reaelied—between—Eps4ein—and—the Gevernmentrhitigatiffil-eentinues-te-this-clay4e-ebtain-the-seFFespendenee-regarding-the-state preseeutieli—aftel—tegareling—svhat--Fi3steinIs—attemeys-sekl—in—the—eerrespendenee—,.,iith—the preseeutepsrEdwfwels-DeeleFeRien.4-22 52. In-mid4u1y40-14r Jane-Dee-it-l-and-Jane-Dee-002-settled-theifrek44-lawsui4s-against-.Mfr Epstein,?.1etiee-ef4his-feet-wastrempt4),-pres4ded4e4he-GeuctrEdwards-DeeleFatien-at-)eet7 53. On-Septembef-8r 20-1-0r the Court entered an order stating that "[a]n examination of the deeket-feyeals-that-ne-aetivity4uts4aken-pleee4wthis-ease-sinee-Appil-ef-2009,In-light-ef-the underlying-settlements-between4he-vieti.ms-and4frEpsteinr it-is-hereby-ordered-end-adjudged thei-this-ease-is-elesed eerita& 54. Prempt*eti-the-heels-ef-this-administrative-efElefr eft-Septembef-13r 20-1-Or Jane-Dee41-and hne-Dee42-ft4ed-a-netiee-that4hey intentl-te-rnake-subsequent-filing-in4ke-ease-shectlyrThey aeoerdingl.,4-request-administrative-reepening-ef4he-ease-andr ifihe-Geart-deems4t-ath4sakkler a sehedutingeettferenee-3.vitli-the-lokSrlarttemey4-Affiee4egarding-the-ease eer#39-et-1 They fucther-ediriseekthe-CAUft-that-theifrsettlements-with4effrehBpstein4fEne-svey-e4Beted theif EFTA00191283 detemina —the-648:-Mterney-ts-Offtee-fef-the-Seuthern-Distriet-ef-Plemila—ki-at-2—The-pleadtitg-fuft n-ex-pedh ne-Dee p-an-expedited-sehedide-fer pfeeeeding-en-the-ease --The-pleading-fufther-advised-that-the-reason-the-vietims had not filed—fer—sufficaary—j*dgment—in—the—ease—was—that—they—had—been—attemptiftg to secure eerrespendenee-between-the-I terneyls-Affiee-antl-Espstein-to-oeFFebeFate-theif-argument ts -14,tey-Freted-that-they-Itad-jast-sesured-ilalf-ef-that eeFFespenilenee-two-nienths-earlier. Id. at 2. The vietir A-deems-it advisabler that-a-seheeltiliftg-c-enfeFenee-he-set-fer-this-ease 55. At-all-tinles-nutterial-to-th. federal government to inlrm-Jane Doe Ill and Jane Doe fl2 of the details of the proposed non prosecution agreement with Epstein, including in partioular the fact that the agreement barred any-federal-eriminal-pnaseention=Edwards-Deelafation at 11 26. SO AGREED AND STIPULATED TO, THIS DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010. BRADLEY J. EDWARDS COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS WIFREDO A. FERRER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY By: DEXTER LEE ASSISTANT U.S. ATI'ORNEY EFTA00191284 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 I UNITED STATES STIPULATION The parties to this action, that is, Jane Doe #1, Jane Doe #2, and the United States of America, by and through their undersigned counsel, do hereby stipulate and agree that the following facts are true and correct and that no further evidentiary hearing is required with respect to the pending "Victim's Emergency Petition for Enforcement of Crime Victim Right Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3771. 1. In 2006, at the request of the Palm Beach Police Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") opened an investigation into allegations that Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein") and his personal assistants had used facilities of interstate commerce to induce young girls between the ages of thirteen and seventeen to engage in prostitution, amongst other offenses. The case was presented to the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, which accepted the case for investigation. 2. At the time that the investigation was opened, the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office had presented evidence to a state grand jury, which had returned an EFTA00191285 indictment charging solicitation of prostitution. That charge made no reference to the ages of the minor victims and, upon conviction, did not require sex offender registration. 3. Jane Doe #1 is a woman with initials C.W., and Jane Doe #2 is a woman with initials T.M. Both were victims of Epstein's while they were minors beginning when they were fifteen years old. Both Jane Does were identified through the Palm Beach Police Department's investigation of Epstein. 4. Attached as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and 4 to the Declaration of A. Marie Villafana are true and correct copies of victim notification letters sent to Jane Does 1 and 2 from the United States Attorney's Office and the FBI. 5. Throughout the investigation, the FBI agents and the Assistant U.S. Attorney had several meetings with Jane Doe #1. During those meetings, Jane Doe #1 never expressed a desire to be consulted prior to the resolution of the investigation. Jane Doe #2 was represented by counsel and, accordingly, all contact was made through that attorney. That attorney never expressed that Jane Doe #2 wanted to be consulted prior to the resolution of the investigation. 6. In September 2007, Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office reached an agreement whereby the United States would defer federal prosecution in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, so long as certain basic preconditions were met, those included a conviction on a state sex offense that reflected that the victims were minors at the time the crimes occurred and that would require sex offender registration. Another key objective for the United States Attorney's Office was to preserve a federal remedy for "2" EFTA00191286 the young girls whom Epstein had sexually exploited. The Agreement contained an express confidentiality provision. The Agreement was subsequently modified in October and December 2007. 7. Although individual victims were not consulted regarding the agreement, several had expressed concerns regarding the exposure of their identities at trial and they desired a prompt resolution of the matter. At the time the agreement and the modifications were signed in September, October, and December 2007, Jane Doe #2 was openly hostile to the prosecution of Epstein. 8. In October 2007, shortly after the initial agreement was signed, Jane Doe # I was contacted to be advised regarding the resolution of the investigation. On October 2007, Special Agents E. Nesbitt Kuyrkendall and Jason Richards met in person with Jane Doe #1. The Special Agents explained that the investigation had been resolved, that Epstein would plead guilty to two state offenses, he would be required to register as a sex offender for life, and he had made certain concessions related to the payment of damages to the victims, including Jane Doe #1. Jane Doe #1 also was advised that Epstein would be entering a guilty plea in state court on October __, 2007, although the October change of plea did not take place. During this meeting, Jane Doe #1 did not raise any objections to the resolution of the matter. 9. Jane Doe #1 misunderstood the explanation provided by the Special Agents, believing that only the State part of the Epstein investigation had been resolved, and that the federal investigation would continue, possibly leading to a federal prosecution. EFTA00191287 10. When Epstein's attorneys learned that some of the victims had been notified, they complained that the victims were receiving an incentive to overstate their involvement with Epstein in order to increase their damages claims. Following the signing of the Agreement and the modifications thereto, Epstein's performance was delayed while he sought to rescind the Agreement. Throughout that period, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's Office maintained contact with the victims, to be prepared if Epstein were to renege on the agreement. 11. After Jane Doe # I had been notified of the terms of the agreement, but before Epstein performed his obligations, Jane Doe #1 contacted the FBI because Epstein's counsel was attempting to take her deposition and private investigators were harassing her. Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafafta secured pro bono counsel to represent Jane Doe #1 and several other identified victims in connection with the criminal investigation. Pro bono counsel was able to assist Jane Doe #1 in avoiding the improper deposition. 12. In mid-June 2008, Attorney Edwards contacted AUSA Villafafia to inform her that he represented Jane Doe #1 and, later, Jane Doe #2. Attorney Edwards asked to meet to provide information regarding Epstein. Attorney Edwards was asked to send any information that he wanted considered, but did not send anything. 13. On Friday, June 27, 2008, at approximately 4:15 p.m., AUSA Villafafia received a copy of Epstein's proposed state plea agreement and learned that the plea was scheduled for 8:30 a.m., Monday, June 30, 2008. AUSA Villafafta and the Palm Beach Police Department attempted to provide notification to victims in the short time that "4" EFTA00191288 Epstein's counsel had provided. Attorney Edwards was called to provide notice to his clients regarding the hearing. 14. On July 9, 2008, AUSA Villafafia sent a victim notification to Jane Doe #1 via her attorney, Bradley Edwards, which is attached as Exhibit 6 to the Villafafia Declaration. That notification contains a written explanation of the full terms of the agreement between Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office. A notification was not provided to Jane Doe #2 because the agreement limited Epstein's liability to victims whom the United States was prepared to name in an indictment. SO STIPULATED AND AGREED. Dated: BRADLEY EDWARDS, ESQ. Attorney for Plaintiffs Jane Does #1 & 2 R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Dated: By: ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY DEXTER LEE Attorney for Defendant United States -5- EFTA00191289 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 1of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE #1 and JANE DOE #2, Plaintiffs, 1. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant, ROY BLACK, et al., Intervenors. / INTERVENORS' MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW Intervenors Roy Black, Martin Weinberg, and Jeffrey Epstein, pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 26.1, respectfully move this Court for the entry a Protective Confidentially Order which (1) limits the dissemination of certain Confidential Discovery Material ("CDM") described below, to a designated list of the Plaintiffs' counsel and support staff, and (2) prohibits any party from filing pleadings, briefs, memorandums or exhibits purporting to reproduce, quote, paraphrase or summarize any CDM or portions thereof, absent leave of the Court to file the document or portion thereof under seal in accordance with Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. See Exhibit 1, Proposed Protective Confidentiality Order. EFTA00191290 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 2 of 13 In support of this motion, the Intervenors submit the following Memorandum. Part I sets forth the background of this matter. Part II demonstrates why the Court can and should issue the requested protective order. MEMORANDUM I. BACKGROUND Intervenor Jeffrey Epstein entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") with the government in September, 2007. Under that agreement, Mr. Epstein pled guilty to two state felony offenses and served a prison sentence and a term of community control probation. The agreement, with which he has fully complied, also required that he pay the legal fees of the attorney-representative of identified victims and that he not contest liability in any cases brought against him solely under 18 U.S.C. § 2255. Plaintiffs sued under § 2255 and received settlements as the direct result of Mr. Epstein's agreement not to contest liability in those cases. Plaintiffs, such as the Jane Does in this case, "relied on the [NPA] when seeking civil relief against Epstein . . . and affirmatively advanced the terms of the [NPA] as a basis for relief from Epstein." United States' Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Doc. 205-6 at 12-13. After reaping the benefits of the NPA, the plaintiffs seek herein, among other remedies, the rescission of that agreement. During the course of civil litigation against Mr. Epstein, Mr. Epstein was ordered, over his strenuous objection, to produce documents given to him by the government during the course of his settlement/plea negotiations with it. See -2- EFTA00191291 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 3 of 13 Jane Doe #2'. Epstein, No. 08-80119-MARRA, Doc. 462. Once the CVRA action was reactivated — after plaintiffs had successfully pursued their civil monetary remedies against Mr. Epstein to completion — plaintiffs sought to use that correspondence in the CVRA case and thereafter also sought disclosure from the government of correspondence authored and sent to the government by Mr. Epstein's attorneys in the course of their efforts on behalf of their client to resolve the ongoing criminal investigation of him. Both Mr. Epstein and his criminal defense attorneys - Intervenors Roy Black and Martin Weinberg — filed motions to intervene for the limited purpose ofchallenging the use and disclosure of the settlement/plea negotiation correspondence (Doc. 56, 93), followed by supplemental briefing and motions contending, among other things, that the correspondence fell within the bounds of privilege under Fed. R. Evid. 501. Doc. 94, 160,161, 162. This Court granted the motions to intervene (Doc. 158, 159), but ultimately ruled that the correspondence — the CDM at issue in the instant motion — was subject to disclosure. Doc. 188. Among other things, the Court rejected Intervenors' argument based on Rule 501 on the ground that Congress has already addressed the issue in Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(0 and Fed. R. Evid. 410 and likewise rejected the Intervenors' request that the Court recognize a privilege for plea negotiation communications. Id. at 8-9. The Intervenors appealed the Court's ruling to the Eleventh Circuit. However, on April 14, 2014, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the Court's rulings using the same rationales. -3- EFTA00191292 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 4 of 13 II. ARGUMENT Although the Court ruled that the Plaintiffs could discover the CDM, the Court reserved ruling on how the Plaintiffs could use the material thereafter, expressly cautioning that "this order is not intended to operate as a ruling on the relevance or admissibility of any particular piece of correspondence, a matter expressly reserved for determination at the time of final disposition." Doc 188, p. 10. Unless and until the Court determines those reserved issues, the Court should bar the Plaintiffs from disseminating and/or publicly disclosing the substance of the CDM absent further order of the Court. A. Discovery Should Not Be Routinely Made Available to the Public "The Eleventh Circuit has repeatedly acknowledged the private nature of discovery" Looney I Moore, No. 2:13-CV-00733-KOB (N.D. Ala. April 7, 2014), 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48349, at *3, citing Chicago Tribune Co. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1316 (11'1' Cir. 2001) ("Discovery, whether civil or criminal, is essentially a private process because the litigants and the courts assume that the solepurpose of discovery is to assist trial preparation.") (quoting UnitedStates'. Anderson, 799 F.2d 1438, 1441(11'h Cir. 1986; emphasis in original). See also Anderson, 799 F.2d at 1441 ("Historically, discovery materials were not available to the public or press.") (citation omitted); In re: Denture Cream Products Liability Litigation, No. 09-2051-MD-Altonaga/Simonton (S.D. Fla. Jan. 18, 2013), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8114, at *37 ("the common law right of access to judicial proceedings does not apply to discovery materials, `as these materials are neither public -4- EFTA00191293 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 5 of 13 documents nor judicial records') (quoting Chicago Tribune, 263 F.3d at 1311; citation omitted). Thus, "[a] court may restrict distribution of discovery material even if there 'certainly is a public interest in knowing more' about its contents." Tillman'. C.R. Bard, Inc., Case No. 3:13-cv-222-J-34JBT (M.D. Ha. March 13, 2014), 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41406, at *6, quoting Seattle Times Co.'. Rhinehart, 467 U.S. 20, 31 (1984) Placing limitations on the dissemination and use of pretrial discovery is particularly important since "[t]he overwhelming majority of documents disclosed during discovery are likely irrelevant to the underlying issues...." Federal Trade Commission. Abbvie Products LLC, 713 F.3d 54, 63 (11'" Cir. 2013). Therefore, "[s]uch documents, prior to admission into the record in support of a motion or as evidence at trial, 'play no role in the performance of Article III functions' of a federal judge." Travelers Indemnity Co.. ExcaliburReinsurance Corp., No. 3:1I -CV-1209 (CSH) (D. Conn. Aug. 5, 2013), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110400, at *37, quoting United States', Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1050 (2d Cir. 1995). These principles are vitally important here where counsels' private communications with prosecutors "if publicly released could be damaging to reputation and privacy" and would likely constitute an "abuse of [a court's] processes." Seattle Times, 467 U.S. at 35 While courts have recognized that settlement agreement materials may sometimes be discoverable, see, e.g., In re MSTG, Inc., 675 F.3d 1337, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2012),' they are But see Wagner'. Wash{/)`, Case No. 2:08-cv-431 (S.D. Ohio May 14, 2013), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68349 (denying motion to compel discovery ofsettlement agreement on relevancy grounds); Duncan' Phoenix SupportedLiving, Inc., No. 2:05cvl (W.D. N.C. Sept. 12, 2006), 2006 U.S. Dist. (continued...) -5- EFTA00191294 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 6 of 13 rarely admissible as evidence at trial, see, e.g, LaserDynamics. Inc. Quanta Computer, Inc., 694 F.3d 51, 78 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (reversing district court for admitting settlement agreement at trial); Apple, Inc.'. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Case No. 1-CV-01846- LHK (N.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2013), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160337, at "51-54 (barring parties from relying on settlement agreement at trial under Fed. R. Evid. 403). For this reasons alone, it is appropriate to limit the dissemination and use of discovery concerning settlement discussions, even if not privileged. See Charles E. Hill & Associates, Inc. I. ABT Electronics, Inc., 854 F. Supp. 2d 427, 430 (E.D. Tex. 2012) (designating discovery material including settlement communications as "Outside Counsel Eyes Only Confidential Information" and cautioning parties that while it is allowing the discovery it intends to later weigh relevance carefully and noting that settlement negotiations are "always suspect to some degree and are often littered with unreal assertions and unfounded expectations ... And are not always grounded in facts or reason."). Indeed, unless and until the Plaintiffs demonstrate a bona fide need to use the discovery at trial or in pleadings, the Intervenors need not even demonstrate "good cause" in order to obtain relief. As the Hon. Karon Owen Bowdre, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama recently held: '(...continued) LEXIS 66742, at "9-11 (finding settlement communications non-discoverable as "not .. Likely to lead to the disclosure of admissible evidence" and would tend to chill settlement efforts) (citations omitted). -6- EFTA00191295 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 7 of 13 Based on this standard ofpractice, the court finds that restricting the use of discovery materials to case-related purposes only, even over Plaintiffs' objection, is within this court's discretion and authority even without the application of the Rule 26(c) good cause standard. By its text, Rule 26(c) applies to situations where the court is either limiting what a party has to produce at all in the discovery process, or limiting public access to documents that are actuallyfiled in the case. Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 26(c). The disputed limitation in this case does not fall into either of these categories.... Looney I Moore, No. 2:13-CV-00733-KOB (N.D. Ala. April 7, 2014), 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48349, at ** 4-5 (emphasis in original). B. Good Cause Exists For the Protective Order In Any Event Even if the Intervenors would be required to demonstrate "good cause" for the requested protective order at this point, that standard is met where restrictions are appropriate under Rule 26(c) to protect the Intervenors from "annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense." See Looney, 2014 U.S. Dist. LENS 48349, at *5; Irizarry- Santiago'. Essilor Industries, 293 F.R.D. 100, 104 (D. P.R. 2013). The Intervenors include not only the third-party client whose non-prosecution agreement is the one Plaintiffs are trying to undo but also the client's attorneys, who are even further removed from the actual litigants. Counsels' lengthy arguments may or may not have had any influence on the government's decision-making and, therefore, their relevance is particularly remote. CI United States'. Byrd, Crim. No. 13-0266-WS (S.D. Ala. April 7, 2014), 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48035, at "14-18 (denying newspaper's motion to obtain copies of unsolicited sentencing letters mailed to the judge prior to sentencing, despite "no formal promises of -7- EFTA00191296 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 8 of 13 secrecy or confidentiality," because "the privacy interests of the letter writers and the interests of the judicial system in obtaining hones, uncensored input" outweighed public's interest in disclosure, especially where the sentencing letters "neither drove no significantly impacted the sentencing decision" which was based on a plea agreement). Like the situation at issue in Looney, the instant case is a "high profile" one and should not be "tried in the media, rather [than] in the courtroom." Looney, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEX1S 48349, at *5. Moreover, there is a well documented history in this case of the media reporting inflammatory statements made by Plaintiffs' counsel, either directly to the press or in pleadings, and these statements have frequently been based on discovery materials. See, e.g., Attorneys Say Miami Prosecutors Violated Crime Victims' Rights Act, Main Justice, March 22, 2011 (quoting Plaintiffs' motion asserting that the U.S. Attorney's Office "deliberately misled' them and claiming that the "only reason" the U.S. Attorney's Office "concealed the existence of the non-prosecution agreement from them was "to avoid a firestorm of public controversy that would have erupted if the sweetheart plea dal with a politically connected billionaire had been revealed"); Attorneys want Jeffrey Epstein agreement thrown out, PalmBeachDailyNews.com, March 21, 2011 (repeating aforementioned accusations from Plaintiffs' motion attacking the U.S. Attorney's Office, adding that the Office had allegedly engaged in a "pattern of deception" and noting that Plaintiffs' motion had made references to "e-mails and letters from the federal office to Epstein's lawyers"); News Reports about Billionaire Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Highlight the -8- EFTA00191297 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 9 of 13 Importance of Victims Rights, BriefingWire.com, March 8, 2011 (quotingPlaintiffs' counsel saying "we took on powerful people and sought to level the playing field to protect victims" and that he "hopes that the media attention" will "inspire victims" to "hold predators accountable"); Judge Receives Epstein Tape Ruling Pending, Palm Beach Daily News, May 5, 2010 (quoting plaintiffs' counsel as arguing that a 22-minute tape recording ofMr. Epstein was "'critical" in showing his alleged "'lack ofremorse" and that he was a "pitiless" sexual abuser); Lawyer: Epstein Made Admissions On Tape, Palm Beach Daily News (FL), April 29, 2010 (quoting Plaintiffs' motion concerning the same tape recording); Attorney For Epstein Victims: 'I have Never Seen A Stranger Case', Palm Beach Daily News, September 20, 2009, p. A.1 (quoting Plaintiffs' counsel as opining that Mr. Epstein "could have gone to prison for life," that he had "never seen a stranger case" and that the U.S. Attorney's Office was effectively "saying we'll do everything in our power to see he doesn't get punished"); Palm Beach sex offender's secret plea deal: Possible co-conspirators not charged, presses victims to settle civil suits, The Palm Beach Post, September 18, 2009 (quoting Plaintiffs' counsel as saying that non-prosecution agreement "taught [the victims] that someone with money can buy his way out of anything. It's outrageous and embarrassing...."); Judge to Rule on Sealed Plea-Deal Papers Today, Palm Beach Daily News, June 25, 2009, p. A.1 (reporting Plaintiffs' counsel saying that he wanted to use the settlement documents in depositions); Hearing Set to Consider Secrecy of Plea Bargain, Sun-Sentinel (Ft. Lauderdale, Florida), Palm Beach Edition, June 15, 2009, p. 38 (in -9- EFTA00191298 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 10 of 13 response to reporter's question about whether he thought Mr. Epstein had received special treatment, Plaintiffs' counsel quoted as saying: "Are you kidding? It's transparent. Certainly, no one else gets treated like that"). See Composite Exhibit 2. The publicity-generating comments by Plaintiffs' counsel have continued since the Eleventh Circuit's ruling. The wave began on April 21, 2014. That day, the Washington Post published a lengthy letter written by one of Plaintiffs' lead counsel containing his editorialized history of the case criticizing the Intervenors' arguments and concluding with his opinion that "the federal prosecutors deliberately concealed the sweetheart plea deal." See Composite Exhibit 3. The same attorney was also quoted by the Sun-Sentinel as making the unsupported accusation that somehow Mr. Epstein "used his political connections and great wealth" to secure a plea bargain that, in counsel's opinion "was unheard of, frankly, if you look at these charges." Id. Also that same day, the Plaintiffs' other lead counsel was quoted by the Palm Beach Daily News as referring to Mr. Epstein as "[a] well-connected billionaire" who "got away with molesting many girls." Appeals court rules against sex offender; Attorneys for underage victims seek to overturn 'sweetheart plea', PalmBeachDailyNews.com, April 21, 2014. Id. On April 22, 2014, the same attorney issued a "press release" likewise trumpeting the appellate victory, identifying Mr. Epstein's counsel by name and containing a personal statement from counsel. See Composite Exhibit 4. In a parallel article published in the Daily Business Review, Plaintiffs' counsel was quoted as follows: "Edwards said the -10- EFTA00191299 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 11 of 13 documents at this point will be disclosed only to the plaintiffs and will not become part of the public record." Id. (emphasis added). The implication of the "at his point" qualifier suggests that Plaintiffs' counsel plan to inject the private discovery into "the public record" at a later date. The next day, April 23, 2014, the Facebook page for the Farmer Jaffe Weissing law firm began posting multiple photographs of Mr. Epstein with links to numerous newspaper articles about the case, along with snippets ofprejudicial quotations from Plaintiffs' counsel. See Composite Exhibit 5. The same comments were then posted on the law firm's blog "www.pathtojustice.com with yet another large photograph ofMr. Epstein, resembling a mug shot. Id. The blog includes such personalized opinions, such as: "We have a very strong case that, prodded by Epstein, the federal prosecutors deliberately concealed the sweetheart plea deal." Id. In light of the prominence of this case in the media, the repeated use of the media by Plaintiffs counsel to drum up support for their case (and to prejudice the community against Mr. Epstein and his counsel), and the Plaintiffs' suggestion that they could make the CDM available to the public in the future (just not "at this point"), the requested protective order is more than justified. As Chief Judge Bowdre likewise concluded in a similar, but less egregious, situation: The court has already expressed to the parties its concern that this potentially high profile case will be tried in the media, rather in the courtroom. Significant media coverage of the case has already occurred. In the interest of justice, this court is -I 1- EFTA00191300 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 12 of 13 committed to giving both parties a fair trial, which includes protecting the Defendants from the "annoyance, embarrassment, [and] oppression" that could occur from allowing their names to be dragged through the metaphorical mud before a jury has even made any determination of wrongdoing. At least one other court has cited the risk ofexcessive publicity preventing the selection of an impartial jury as legitimate supin for a finding of good cause under Rule 26(c). See Anderson Cryovac, Inc., 805 F.2d I, 4 (1st Cir. 1986) (overturning the district court's decision on other grounds). As such, the court finds that good cause exists to support the Protective Order as written.... Looney'. Moore, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48349, at "5-6. LOCAL RULE 7.1(a)(3) CERTIFICATION Counsel hereby certify that they have conferred with all parties who may be affected by the relief sought in this motion in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in the motion and have been unable to do so. Plaintiffs oppose this motion. CONCLUSION For all of the foregoing reasons, the Court should GRANT this motion and enter the requested Protective Order. Respectfully submitted, /s/Roy Black Roy Black Jackie Perczek BLACK, SREBNICK, KORNSPAN & STUMPF, P.A. 201 So. Biscayne Blvd., Suite 1300 Miami, Florida 33131 Tele: (305) 371-6421 -12- EFTA00191301 Case 9 08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 13 of 13 Fax: (305) 358-2006 rblackQrovblack.com joerczekQrovblack.com Attorneysfor Intervenors /s/Martin G. Weinberg Martin G. Weinberg 20 Park Plaza, Suite 1000 Boston, Massachusetts 02116 Tele: (617) 227-3700 Fax: (617) 338-9538 owlmgw(aatt.net Attorneyfor Intervenors CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HERE CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was filed via CM/ECF, this 2ad day of May, 2014. /s/Rov Black Roy Black -13- EFTA00191302 Case 9:08,,80736-KAM Document 247-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 1 of 6 COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 4 EFTA00191303 f:2r2oCase 9:08-cv-807B6**Mmtlitoawricteritc2141u4n8rstenickeneltinititioekeP06,00/005.4e«Page 2 of 6 NOT FOR REPRINT DAILY BUSINESS REVIEW L= Click to Print or Select 'Print' in your browser menu to print this document. Page printed from: Dully E3usiness Review Prosecutors Must Turn Over Docs In Billionaire Sex Offender Jeffrey Epstein Case John Pacenti, Daily Business Review April 22, 2014 Roy Black Partner Black, Srebnick, Kornspan & Stumpf Attorneys for two alleged sexual assault victims trying to negate a federal nonprosecution agreement with billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein applauded a decision by a federal appellate court as a triumph for victims' rights. But Epstein's celebrity defense attorney Roy Black said the decision by the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Atlanta undercuts the plea negotiation process and attorney-client privilege. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed an order requiring prosecutors to turn over documents about plea discussions with Epstein. The decision also lifted an appellate stay on the ruling by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra in West Palm Beach to allow the release of documents to the women, identified in court papers only as Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2. The women say they were sexually molested as minors by Epstein and claim federal prosecutors violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act when they negotiated the nonprosecution agreement in 2007. Both sides agreed the opinion sets a precedent unrivaled in other federal circuits. "So much of the legal area of victims' rights is breaking new ground and new territory," said Jay Howell, a Jacksonville appellate lawyer who represented the women. "The court decision here expands the rights of the victims and the victims' ability to discover information about the criminal case." http Worm.dailybustnessmiew.conYcs/Satelhte%:Micte_Cactildpagerarne.DBR%2FArticle_C%2FArUcletaffloputs%2FPrinterFriendly&pagenamcpADA 113 EFTA00191304 9:08-cv-80761TaktAivAluDbingreiltcEligultnalEntaftlderlefrttnieNelted5962r2tflteNPage 3 of 6 5r21201CaSe He said the women have stuck with the case out of "a fundamental sense of injustice" for the underage victims of Epstein. Black, a partner at Black, Srebnick, Komspan & Stumpf in Miami, said the 23-page opinion issued Friday has wider implications in plea bargains. No longer can defense attorneys be candid with prosecutors when trying to negotiate a plea, he said. "This is now the leading precedent holding that plea bargain discussions are not confidential, and now criminal defense lawyers must censor their communications with prosecutors," Black said. "The Eleventh Circuit has ruled there is no privilege, there is no confidentiality." Miami attorney Joseph DeMaria, a partner at Fox Rothschild and former federal prosecutor, said while the opinion is legally correct, it could have a significant impact on the 90 percent of federal cases resolved by pleas. He said it now is up to Congress to amend the Crime Victims' Rights Act to carve out a safeguard for defendants. He foresees "a chilling effect on plea negotiations where victims are aggressively seeking information? "If these type of plea discussions are now discoverable by victims, then it's going to cause significant problems for the government and defendants in trying to resolve criminal cases," DeMaria said. Epstein was accused of luring underage women to his Palm Beach mansion for sex. The television show "Law & Order SVU" had a "ripped from the headlines" episode based on Epstein, who is also known for his celebrity connections Flight logs show former President Bill Clinton flew on Epstein's private plane 10 times from 2002 to 2005. Plea bargain The appellate case stems from a decision by federal prosecutors not to charge Epstein if he pleaded guilty to state charges in Palm Beach Circuit Court for soliciting an underage girl for prostitution. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail and house arrest. Epstein moved back to New York City from Palm Beach after he finished his sentence. The women contend they could have argued against the nonprosecution agreement if they were informed before the agreement was reached. "Our clients want to see Mr. Epstein held accountable for the numerous sex offenses he committed against many children," said Bradley Edwards, the women's trial counsel and a partner at Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos & Lehrman in Fort Lauderdale. Edwards said the documents at this point will be disclosed only to the plaintiffs and will not become part of the public record. Andrew Levi, a partner at Lehr Levi & Mendez in Miami and former federal prosecutor, said once documents are in the hands of civil attorneys they can easily be passed on to news media or put in other court records. http /WA./ claihtxrsinessre‘l ew ccmts/Saldlite7c•Nlicle_C&childpagenam0=DBR%2FArUcle_C%2FArtscle%2FLartAs%2FPrinterFriendly&pagenarreALM 23 EFTA00191305 °'€ase 9:08-cv-8078,sicsaiNlmulDbeerPritlItc219fuleaEffrectielderrieffrbWebeeli+Peog852$201.(ftowPage 4 of 6 "It's not as if they are given to the attorney with any type of limitation attached," he said. "We are going to have to see how this plays out in the future to determine if this decision has a chilling effect on the candor and possibly the effectiveness of communications by defense counsel when negotiating a plea." Unanimous opinion Epstein's criminal defense attorneys, Black and Martin G. Weinberg of Boston, intervened in the appeal as third parties. The appellate ruling was written by one of the more conservative members of the Eleventh Circuit. Judge William H. Pryor said the federal rule of evidence cited by Epstein in the interlocutory appeal did not protect him against discoverability of plea negotiations. "And even if they did, Epstein clearly falls outside its protection because he entered a guilty plea and the victims intend to use the correspondence against the United States, not against Epstein," Pryor wrote. He was joined in the unanimous decision by Judge Beverly Martin and U.S. District Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell of Orlando, sitting by designation. The U.S. attorneys office in Miami argued before Marra that the victims did not need to be notified of the agreement because the women's liberty was not at stake. It also took the position that the Crime Victims Right Act did not apply unless federal charges were filed against Epstein. Victims' Rights Howell said the decision indicates how courts have come around to the victim's point of view. He said as a state prosecutor in 1978, victims' rights were nearly non-existent. "There has been a fundamental change in the courts," he said. "It's only been in the last 30 years that courts examines things from the view point of the victim." He said plaintiffs attorneys have asked the Justice Department in Washington why Epstein was offered the nonprosecution agreement but were told all decisions on the billionaire were made in Florida. "Why was such a lenient deal offered?" Howell asked. "Washington is supposed to be tough on crimes against children, but the decision in this case certainly disputes that policy." Copyright 2014. ALM Media Properties, LLC. All rights reserved. httpliwom.dalpusinessremew.comics/Satellite7cgArticleSdaildpagenarnegoBR%2FArticles_C%2FAttic e%2FlayoutelafPrinterFnencilApagenamo=ALM 3/3 EFTA00191306 sr2rg (Case 9:08-cv-8074€0KANIRLDOefmciea4,247AcitimEntteieficonteretBilsOettlstateMP2OlcilmoPage 5 of 6 PRLOG Pin:S[40i0350 RAORatan Search r-- al 1 -"ni Solna I Pious RDleas PR Haim Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Crime Victims' Daily News Country News Rights in Registered Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Case gaited Stites Assida.kCaSit fortiralia &Sal t Warlatilf0 In a landmark decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Court on wag Paton Rerigtagrer April 18 2014, ruled In favor of two crime victims represented by Farmer Jaffe Beim tone WelteJng Partner Brad Edwards and his co-counsel. Paul Cassell Yes' akshia inteouc,“ grand tampion. Collect on F0 watt:aft litter...se eafatlelJesugalissbrus ftbdLiidtddafLS eulaS_Sailiarattuticiv PRCoy (PresTReleiso)• Apr. 22, 2014 • FORT LAUDERDALE, FM. - Contact teadi.01444.41a Brad Edwards. Farmer. Jails Weissing. Edwards. QW :venire. Glom Philos & Lehrman P L Custom Tote Bag b'i.'is nail /0)1'W ftesThrillTheatialliai.fauseJ (000)4001098 la News Visiaornt flaphin.fddistesig ift!!!if! Kim Sailor. BARD MarkelinyPR yanpya aillaPUPCCO kN kaelerebrucknarkelkm.corn Like what you see' Gel up to 2 5% off Emus.* News . CAVILLEatfoktalf9SSI Step q•slsounden(s ccnk.4 Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Came Victims' Mav 2014 Rights In Registered Pedophile Jolley Epstein Weekly News I Th Wa Tu hb Su So Case 3 1 F4POSIciaa Tplenz_pap /Awe Stars Unite at Sinter Aorii2o14 In a landmark decision. the V S Cowl of Appeals Fide m ',Mho Conte. 20 Z:,2 211 ZL for the Eleventh Ciecul Court on April 18. 2014 ;zoo:MIAM AwarCeji • ivied In favor of two crime deigns represented by o964 Sows Farmer. fats Wafting. Edwards Filet EvialtutEititLit'ae Lehrman Partner Brad Edwards and he co-coansel Paul Cassell. Ronald N. Boyce Presidential Pf0105$01 of Criminal Law - S.J. aumney Col ego of Low al the Unisersity of Utah. The ruling uphold the C7!, Darnel Court wrath ordered the United Stales Attorney's Dike to made the yams and their adocatcs the largo .dune of correspondence exchanged between Jeffrey Epstein and the Dr:nommen! IbcfMacialtiltaC Ltsjagightgiggs . that resulted In the goiemmant electing not to Federally prosecute Epstein lor his many sexual crimes 1256 News against children. Attorneys Edwards and Cassell argued the case bolero the Elmonlh Circuit in Ult.f.2.5...9.5tustese February. against attorneys Roy Black and Marlin Weinberg ustvais trasthski .826 NOV* The case in oleos a federal criminal in atigzeicri that resulted la the Federal Gcnomment learning that (panne, Bros a Lisa 111colit Jeffrey Epste n and certain co-conspirators scrawly abused dozens and dozens of minor girls in West cniloceron Retinal/Model Palm Beach. Florida. Epstein ull-maiely reached a plea deal under watch he plead gu Hy only to a MEMO stwon Mormon ip to. charge of procuring a minor lot prostitution in exchange for the Federal Gcnornmonl agree rig not to yea r001101 • 714 sews pursue federal sox climes on behalf of mom than 40 dooms. Represented by Attorney Brad Edwards and Paul Cassel. Iwo of the gds sought to ham the plea deal Woven out because prosecutors had not NH 22 2019 hews informed them of what was happen rig and had taken steps to conceal the peculiar plea arrangements. The tad rns moved to rime access to the correspondence between prosecutors and dolonso attorneys to prom thaw case The EleveMh Circuit ruled that that the riches were entitled to haw ;Cent to the melons!, Agreeing wth Attorneys Edwards and Cassel. the Elmenth Circuit need that the communications were not pneleged or otherwise barred from distribution The ElotoMh Cretin Greta mod that the yams should Iiir.oy an eMdenhary benefit from the disclosure of plea negotiations to prove where the United Stales Violated their rigNs ‘ndisi the [Come Viet mi Rights) Act Upon teaming of the ruling Attorney Brad Edwards stated 'The Notion halo fought hard for almost 6 years now to team why the person who molestea them and many other ch.ldren was ultimately allowed to the ahem the law end mold being held accountable for his crimes. I'm planed that The Elmenth Circuit has made this ruling which will bring the Vet ms one step closer to knowing the hulh. Wealth and power should not invnunze anyone from punishment for harmful sexual acts against children, in the circumstances when it does the mclims should al least ham access to the explanation why. These documents should begin to explain' Farmer Jere We sting Edwards Fistos & Lehrman. P L., a Fon Lauderdale Negation pain, focuses on Consumer Class Act an Personal Injury. Wrongful Death and WhIstleblcsver Stet Idol teals The line is headquartered al 425 N Andrews Avenue. Stele 2 and may be reached al (800)400-1096 a (954) 524.2820. Additional informahon about Brad Edwards. or Farrar. Jab.. Wresting. Edwards & Lonnie. P.L. may be obtained from the Irrn's websie al Imp irwww,p,oloprfpc,:,a;talgmpary_plarl.-0451625.f. IggailsWAY.01Abe‘fell4S5,601.C.015. of 00.P. :15Ww.P.Oettejtrilli:V.e WI* hiteiNnweptios.org/1231306esappeals•courl-rules-in-liser-el-erime4ctlms-rights-ingegistereSpedophileleareyepstein-case hurl 12 EFTA00191307 512120 ase 9:08-cv-80798MANPREPorartver4F21437440^5Etat4etftthigtiMetleifteeleg7MILEPLIPage 6 of 6 Contact BARD MarkoIlru) aSKSCLIThrli9lin•ISC•2 — End E • -•all Embed PDS Print ri t :1 Contact Erna', . Cue lacl hither •"(psardrrerSoUng corn •-•"" Source : BARD WrIrerlog Cit/Town Fon La, deroale • SlouilA - Muted SLISIC 111OUSPt : Loser Tags : Brae Edwards. Jeffrey Epstein. Cruno V•ctrus Rights, Ulmer one urasono shortcut : prlog oriel 2313086 0111C111111111: 1$$ UOI1 011110 ;1101.. 101041.US are SI.Olyiotputrublo fur me coMoni often, 'wen releases u. be held liable Inr Our cmlam pOSIOCI WI: tot artogoSsusli Latest Press Releases By "emokomesen • sA parrhutweil,"•1 r 0410% Item FOnftei JO," wre12.Shi.. PrulScir•MO re >lb A•001•14KIDS BqS ereril • Crrrern NOT PIO:1..111...A/191.1111111111 .1611 ,11.ttinal • 6e1:11116/11/ Eta 1.21_112O111111.141.1.50.9hIslitt 194h Cotuir Begs'. Lim Corirereuce • Its-ifluttgcoll U.S.ElitSPL&ISIlet lacr.9SitiheSee•Ce FOu•Welcre s Cove° H ribt AnOLtailla • &NanOV GA rL^!ri•^4S9elb,.,n.Lr•KMCIt1ct i licoseeLllutho.• Trending News— • WacctericEsd FAM05j Flamm, Discusses QrsEorfc .Viol on Ctrs , r‘ SMe14 • dificmlinAnalliesitio_Sstaz_konthltRoalarlkUlvasun.Biss:LSIm.facacelat • Var.anikkiLvalsaatiiirm.:_lataq9osd9.5.uktMailafataliate5...P.c.c.Swotsetemaitca • I'Intml&Ins.ludettsik•D FAXISE sAlty..*I.SovillOcelktyksamtnn • counomnom Angounatyro rimer no on Sege Snit lor AWwd Werb.fla lot ri E991100ti rev INTRODUCING FREE SHIPPING EVERY DAY, EVERY ORDER SHOP & SFF CODE Lim PRLog? t 9K 2K 1K tL hop i/vemv.p•log .org /12313086- appeals- court.rules•in.laux•ol•crinwiclims•righls•In•regislerecl•pecicpth le-Jeffrey ORSICIn-CaSC hlrri EFTA00191308 Case 5:05-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 1 of 12 COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 5 EFTA00191309 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 2 of 12 5212014 Fairy Jaffe NtIssIng Farmer Jaffe Weissing 29$ Ito • 44 talong sedan Ito • 9 were heft law haft(' 425 H ANSICWS AVC • Ste. 2, Fo•t ',Werth*, fl edd (SOO) 400-1098 295 Abdul • Suspect so 62.1 Contact tls Woos aces ntOttoptos Post Photo / Video Cm to 10, toendt. to Lae llot Par Set Al ;pc a Irerdo nine... fanner Sale Wolssing reagents. a . Mancliette hark.] Randy Stone...! Farmer Jaffe Weissing Gabe Z.1mbrart0 Ns been selected as a 2019 Top Rated Lawyer In Hass Tart bY ALM & Martindale Hubbell. gik sc. Marco RagessIno hOps://plus.google.com/10180SH2IS7326626220040sesiDoWCV rZPit — with Gabriel F Zambrano. RCMCw o Recent Posts by Others on Fames Jae Wash; See as hOps./Mssw.faceboolccemfarmerJaffeW2IssIng 1129 EFTA00191310 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 3 of 12 92f2014 F atm Jaffe VikissIrg LEGAREAEGIS AV ALM is Rae Sterner Moore Hey WI, bob Se a gixograpii Wry protessenal plate.. mrch 26 at Citsirn Ay•2014TOPRAITOLAWYERS Premier Process Saving saws- MASS TORTS , r Cal Jaclocentles east feta* process scan. Pante, PM febnary 26 M 12 02ote outkoliont Aswan Curaw4 II Bonk Mauls 'Rate Zantraro, ct (artier /WM Webster, b a CO-Chat letwary 25 ill 10 4boa !Itch Twin's a tours wallow ate rats go Canes, - Novella, 2, 2013 al 12 COorn Rsce Point Legal Race Pokt LegalMs detrital tedwtbgy, maltreat and c Seaeryter 12. 201)M 10.15am More Pout Likes Svc All Mime,' Lawsuits I (Oates I Lawyers I Attorneys LOssi Rusnen Aerkan Atsocistion for Justice nt tia tient 'boles U . Cement • State If *sal County Courts byword County] IS wok Ike 021, Marianne Carlisle Salem Way to so, Cobs. (§) tounhowsec CevenineM 0careaten belessbnalsemtes Courtione tie pig' 19 lows tigo • Ua pig bin brockovIeh NOW Mows ISA Stetson gotersIty Colette Of law Pi Colege &Vestin? hie Fanner Jaffe Weissktg shared a Ink • 2 roan sip Activity FJ wig a Lawsult for SOX/sally Assault by a massage Theap st Recent hop //hub.amiliziWap LIM= Fanner Jaffe Weissinci acetic! 7th Annual 4F3DS filing a Lawsuit for Senually CARff Fog Canby SR. Fxness.Sports. Assault by • Mange Therapist . , . • I' Mip Wans,pstMogette.conYtlogitaVI 0.411/0•10.10.1010•••41.11y.elip witSlifengakWwwl losiestraft Fenner Jaffe WabsIng toted a Ink. Yesterday Sexual Assault by Manage Therapists latp://hub.ami Itscga Lie Crown • Skase Stacey Swim best*. S Fanner Jaffe Weaning Ape 29 )ob us In wishing Farmer Jaffe WetsSing - Gary Farmer a Happy aftbdayl St Milli Assault by Massage Therapists httaijnympatMoluslte.attablogibld/344105/ietuakassaUtlar PIMSJIQI•there41 Serval smuts ol genii by imsuge inerapets M itt see are otork9 al let rates ardInnults on te fled. It- Conners • share NOSINniamlacebookcomfrentJatfeiMissing 2/29 EFTA00191311 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 4 of 12 5/22014 Farrier Jaffe WaissIng Fanner hdfe Massing neat ea an event. I apt 29 7"'ANNIIAL :SV..;.:(5. t SK. FITNESS. SP0ATS. •eane "Mr- err no Dr 7th Annual 4ICFDS Big Caleb 5K. fit neSS.SpOits Tomonavi Central froward Retionalead. Fort Lauderdale. Fbetla Istauderht Muth et the frit pinion to pre • tat • fearer< • Shoe t Ill Pinner Jae WebeIng shared a tett Pod 29 'Fated bin attomey I'MattWelssing on May 3 and run the 7dI Annual 4110ds B9 Carrie 5IC Help make a difference In the lives or Florida's roster children. Click I nk Pew to sign-up or make a donation. tat • Coontem • share 27 people Pe US. raw levee content. partrinen:M AWASH inclaibe SS Flora Street 2/3/7011 and aw.a Tommy Stocbefle happy &Ott Gahm,' r SingCrinr,04 Bel Taw Sfstll Se am• Apl 29 at 6:047s • Uke \ +I* Iamb At ka Iron lhhml Aaaaaa ale Bathos 2ambeanaHappe enMay Ap129 at a 4Ipm• Lax sainsubflute salt', Steam thanes and hornIan?, SAnald 'Jaen n S bar/ Awards Al Mon Sop Vst011 hatate•U Fokt. &Wets Ard Net Frnaeti I.os se• rn Farmer Jaffe WelssIng share() a Int MOS 5.4 Ca!Obi Mara. Sweat. Gly•. - 140m• Ap129 .org FIG Canso Skies-mu. Sews. eenettrq 030S or Sovels 'tens • Jon us siColleges and Pun veeSleeS need to face the facts abort May 20Ie to. an aiming ay d finest, spats, scuttles. food an, isexualassault; OVicePresidentladen said In a statement as a 20- It,, 11 Be cart ware supporta.; Ire Is one. page report was released. '14o more turning a blind eye or pretending it doesn't eidst. tie • Catmnit • Shate White House releases report on sex Ana Stall! Otto, tart/ram its the. hip mantle at [alleges snromvashiegicerost.com tiae • Gemmel • Share Golan, &Oda Iles Ns. Fernier Ialle WalssIng federal offdab have Iona a Web see ry1 cake WlAbre.g0. to newt urvanses of sexual duet* on CanguSel One IMO On 10 thelerge cobs. w sooty thee students rod year atxmiA frbomcbxt one other salary bow. APre 29 at 9:49am• Ile S gill Ronny Jane Weaning farmer Jaffe Welseln g shamed a kik. LS Awl Za ata 20 Join us In wishing Kristen Wagner a Happy Birthday, Farmer lee Wes! ng conUntes to evaluate legal clots aganst ItIpelMww.latebOck con*atreerJaffeAtis sing 129 EFTA00191312 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 5 of 12 9212014 Farm JeffelMISSIng Stryker Corporation over thtgr 'recalled aRehreenate & /ASCII hp imPlants• Any questions welcome. NA)://vnwcpathtolvsbCe COM/stryaer-lewsults STRYKER HIP ALGAL LawSullS www patkolusuca.ccm Ilattonwide Cale avablitionsinvcionplatssAIS Spann STRYKER HIP RePACeatilYS follaaine a wee el me athAtilaTE a AMU snown ftelvveruiTE 1A%0 erOadarnerk lerroml to system retitled 1, toy 2013. uke • Coons . Shaft Ike • Cowin • Shart IR Cantinas:a pat. al Clots tin* fll<h nippy entail Ant 28 at 3 - Spero Ile a Anastasia lithos Ca maven* RICO! eintsday Aord 28 at S. Sapp • LW S Pinner latie Welding shared a Ink. Arn 25 Newsweek examines Mena IUD lawsuits and growing number of allegations and claims imohIng use the conuacepove. Do the benefits outweigh the risks? Are they as safe and effective as defined? Those questions remain at the heart of ongoing lawsuits and litigation. Farmer Jaffe Weissing Gabe Zambeano remains an original tought leader on to controversy and we are owStigating darns, as well as accepting new cases. Contact is with questions. hap://www.newsweek.corn/2011/05/02/courtrcomiccotroverstte. nd.pcipulaOcontraceptive-rnirend 248443.harni Co scorn Connoversy Sabina Popular Contraceptive Minns Lae • Convent • Sure Bonne P.UnG gel run. S Fenner lake WelssIng Apt Li Daly Mall reviews I lth Circuit dedslor and Sun Sentinel arbde reagarding kffrey Epste n. Related links appear below. hflpsfiv.w4facebookocenfarmerJaffetAleissing eag EFTA00191313 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 6 of 12 922014 Fortner JAN81%10.21622 SPX Wonder Jeffrey roma solved 13 monies in ;Moot. 2007 for rotenone motion ogle . Um • Cowen • Share Mid. Me lies Um. r Fame r Jaffe Welssing hop awswersagrelcookr...allonarerservenm. La glillonalre's actions to see negotiations that led to lenient sentence twerv.emlaroCcoar The Fixrda hone had moan] mamma ttleitetec paltcaru and groat. See Pore Apt 23 st 6 49pm • tag • I FannerJane Welning mtpthrwn.shatentnetrool...rn tefIrty•totten. . I VktIms ger tight to gee negatlationi that led to lenient' plea agreement for Winonahe sew— vemesuresentneleom O13a Palm troth Wrote Pao Sweat:Pled for neva; Set Went enng gas .. See Pont Apr 23 at 6:49pn • the • 1 a rennet Jaffe Wetsang shared a ma rat Appeals Court Rules In Fever of Calla gICISMS• Rights In Registered Pedophile Jeffrey EPStin Case ht101fttb•aellill99)03 Appeals Court Risks In Favor of FREE CASE Came Victims' Rights In Registered EVpIATION Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Case httplanne.pathtogaterhoonYbtortnt/3 fet.A.Ditglig ue Commit • Sham a Made Ike art this. farmer )af f e Westing shred a Y.A. gprl 23 fain liworrafaCtr0C0gccraFalfferJ0RMAgissing EFTA00191314 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 7 of 12 57/2014 Funs Jaffe Missing Nil us in welcoming attorney eAdamHorovntr to the Farmer Jaffe Weiss'ng Ten Adam loins attorney dead Edwards to further expand die firm's nationwide sCrimetiletlmsR ghls and eSentelAbuse Practice Group. htfp://www.pathanusbre.cnon/adam•lionhwtt: Adam Horowitz tie • Conwen • %we )woe bens Sand., K Simpson Johnson Wetcere shard N. ltormst. Apt 23 at 10 seam • the Ili Reheat MIsOroll Fleischer halal ter *I 24 at 7:37am 4. Farmer Jaffe Watling shoed a int I W Aorl 23 'Our COWS want to see Mr. 0Epstein held accountable for the numerous isexoEfenses he committed against many chkften,' said sEeadlesEdwards, the women's IT al counsel and a partner at Farmer, Jaffe, WeissIng, Edwards, hum & Lehrman in Fort Lauderdale. Prosecutors Must Turn Over foci In acilanaire Se. OfIcndet 'entry Epstein Ca se Mt • Cesnrent • Ssne 2 molelie Ws S Farmer Jaffe Welssing shared a Ink. 1 Awl )2 Fenner Jane WetmIng Mated a Ink. WA 22 The front page d todays Sun-Sencinei • Victims w n right to see AdSdonat neon coverage on attorney leradEchvards case against negotiations that led to 'lenient' plea agreement for bill onatre sex Ueffrey£psteln. Tins 4 a big nefOlY for NS deb and for °Herder leffrestpste n. crentsICOMS. Seventh Occult roles that discovery can bit) Victims Mn right to see negotiations that move Conran, on my Crime Victims R la Ms led to 'lenient' pin agreement ler Act case bellonahe see— wnwarathrotoremscom evasion-senthel Dam use COMM": ' Sham Ur • Connery • 5Nre 6 peope as MY. 8 peooh Se lit S S U Fenner Wellston(' sued a int. awl 2i In recent years, the number of acyclls5 and apedestrians eluded and a *red In *crashes In ibroward and 0Falmdeach counties has spiked. haps //yaw+ facebockccerYFarrnarialfelnkissing &29 EFTA00191315 •Case9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-5 EnteredonFLSDDocket05/02/2014 Page 8 of 12 9212014 FormaMissing t I I farmer Jaffe Weissing Unite Recent Sundae pushes pedestrian, bike safety Recent vowieurvidentheteCni 2014 mace are urgeorg two Oakland Park %obvert:I marimbas webe nip 2013 motet cf bride and cederuen wishes, Wing to educate venone 2012 about the Nes of the road 2011 Uic'Comer4•Slum 2010 Fonred Fenner Sere Massing shared a Int. Apd 11 Sponsored This Is one more step in the fight by Warns' attorneys Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell to overturn the secret deal, which saved Epstein from facing senous federal charges one serving s reticent prison One. 1.0,20Sportewear • ! tgOSCII ra' cc.m Si Si la PI Up to 30% off Appeals court toles against its oleander vatarnt.com lap • Commit • share LI 0 6 pea* lc this VI Made Une ins a ken;nod day. iith rut got a V11. CYgattaaibMI Apt 21 at 11 Mom' uk Her Carey on Wipe tine SheIOWP corn T. SI •tn Farmer Jaffe Missing shared a Ink. Farmer Jaffe Welssing sealed a one. G i 11 Awl le won 17 • fated A STampaDayScho:' principal has been arrested afar arn,lesdrig Local Steadier rearrested and accused of asexuallraSsaiderg a a student he befriended aft the death of his latter. The K•El !student after being warned by stood officials not to spend any FCC6ORIVE %hod Speclataes assisting studeris who have m Id to moderate time alone WM the Swaim. ern3tOn.Cern :t elearnmptliablie. es, dyikna, andety, and ACRD. 14 froward teacher acCui•O of sex vath teen had been yarned to stay any TanottOnSdmOpeMcfpaltmestedelteraWhollkosayhe arlk/eS Suesallndeem molested a stud/At www.tawoniay.com A tylon schoolPalm teacher acCUsed an havro se. nth ore el It A Tana bay SChoolOnCblimes attend Thorny alter authaters 1410Pd! students Ma or (Pada beheld a $910 Intl t now ier.eq rederalcharges. trt ithani %hitt, 24. or... saki he raPannuteU touched a mita, wis nese totem be had Others:ltd. accorded to an anvil mean. Ue'Cament' Sine the • ronn3to • Sha e llonue Nines Vies ln hflp51thwm.lecoboatccenr enrcrJalletftletsalfig 7r.n EFTA00191316 • 5,2/23ase 9:08-cv-8073644404KCoutWytworffEt VaSvicERnIgicttiloSrfeteftPfletikqtrOMM0434e Page 9 of 12 Farmer, Jaffe, Weissing, Edwards, Fistos Et Lehrman, P.L. • 1.855.700-PATH • Proven Resells • Willa • Bles SOICh Current Adsak ID PSS Feed Appeals Court Rules in Favor of Crime Victims' Rights in Registered Pedophile Jeffrey E Epstein Case Posted on Wed, Apr 23,2014 1.1.1/401 ij-inti reek attiglIST1014 Patti 1 ol IPLIBLIsHi N THE UNITI D STATES COURT OF APPEALS FUR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No 11.12923 D.0 Docket No.9 OS•cv.80736-KASI JANE DOE NO. I. JANE DOE NO 2. Plasottifs•AppcIlett setup UNITED STATES OF Al'MC Dtforbeti. ROY BLACK. MARTIN 0 WEINBERG. SEEFRE1 EPSTEIN. Intentoon•Appelloote Appeals eons the Weed States Amite Coon fo the &Mika) APma of Fkuidn tAptil IS 2014) Berme PRYOR Intl MARTIN Cu colt lotto*. awl HONEYWELL.• Dnitici /oast liencratik ChNlais Filwood. Down.di Veined Stun Nano kifc fel the NIIAJk Cnsinci of ilonell lows by einiplavion httpitmew path:cjuslice,ccenticg tbid/343584/Appeals-Coull•Rules•In-Faor-of-CrIme-Victirre.Righls-in- Registered-Pedophile-Jeffrey& Epslei n-Caseil.U2On . 1/4 EFTA00191317 • simoiCase 9:08-cv-8073444thlaburtDoeurruasibWigisEticu&ntweakabbittifigbauloaff$9.102430394 Page 10 of 12 On Friday, April 18, 2014, the Eleventh Circuit mad that discovery can move forward in an important Crime Victims' Rights Act case that my co-counsel Paul Cana and I (Prod Edwards) have been litigating for nearlysix years. The narrow issue before the Circuit was whether prosecutors and defense attorneys share an absolute privilege, to the exclusion of even the victims of the crime, so as to prevent anyone (including the victims) from knowing anything about the plea discussions. The District Court ruled that no such privilege exists and the 11th Circuit has now agreed. In Ws case, the ruling means that the victims will have a chance to review the correspondence exchanged between Epstein and prosecutors to learn how (panty the secretive deal was reached while the victims were lead to believe a prosecution was underway. The ruling will also get the victims one step closer to retuning to the district court and seeking to invadale the plea agreement that was consummated In violation of their rights. We hope that the case wit ultimately set en Important precedent establishing the timing for when victim's rights are triggered and ultimately prevent prosecutors from keeping victims in the dark about the plea deals reached with perpetrators. IltraaPtelr!nr21of Etterrtry:nt .5.r.nelDffent/Yrillerlbal fildlistaYlastibkasalst tirelmehro Smile/Wet ewe MOW I MIEN USN Illinadilalaill 1 Whig Os•rune...4 V/35715 Conecib..w t fr arth the bet of Saisuleallitheie ane cr sinm Wit 1%1 Imo I Mutt. Sat Ma Wirt EMI Ma• Want sew JET HUY I (Milli Date OlPhoto: OVIS/1013 I i; Ti tee/urea a.. A t.e.Lni elltneler. Pedtae ideotificetko cannot be ettettlnIt44 unter. • lincescalnt compiohoot fr. rude. Here are the important facts, taken from the Eleventh Circuits opinion: In 2006 the FBI began investigating allegations that Jeffrey E. Epstein had sexually abused dozens and dozens of minor girls. The titled States Attorneys Office for the Southern Disbict of Florida accepted Epstein's case for prosecution, end the FBI Issued victim notification letters to my two clients, minors Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2, In June and August 2007. Extensive plea negotiations ensued between the United States and Epstein. Despite the investigation revealing that Epstein had molested more than 40 minor girls, in Late 2007, the United Stales entered into a non- prosecution agreement (NPA) with Epstein - esseNiatly egree:ng to immunize Epstein for al of the Federal Sex crimes he committed in exchange for his offer to plead gritty to minor Florida state offenses (e.g., soficitation of prostitution), for Mich he served the majority of his "Ume" In a lush private office, as opposed to a coo. During the Federal Plea negotiations, not only did the United Slates neglect to "meaninghey confer" with the victims before it entered into the agreement with Epstein, It also concealed its existence of the agreement for at least 9 months. For example, the United States sent post-agreement letters to the victims reporting that the 'case Is currently under InvesUgallon" and explaining the( 111hIs can be a length'? Process and we request your continued patience wile we conduct a thorough investigation." Some of those tenon were delivered to victims as late as May. 2008 - many months after the NPA was signed and Just before Epstein's state court plea that served to permanently extinguish the fights of victims. http/Awwinellitciusfice.ccmblogfeld/343584/Appeals.CourtAules-in-Fect-ol-Crirre-Vicbrre-Rights-inReglsteredPedophile-JerfreyE•Epstdn-Casert U2On.. 2/4 EFTA00191318 • sonAltase 9:08-cv-80736019traceoeunlentof3WdlectentenoinlYi2oRiCteceeektetreSeMels4 Page 11 of 12 OnJime 27, 2008. the United Stales Informed me that Epstein planned to plead guilty to the Florida state charges three days later. But the United Stales failed to disclose that Epstein's pleas to those stale charges arose from his federal norkprosecution agreement and that the pleas would bar a federal prosecution. As a result, the victims did not attend the stale court proceedings. In fact, Federal prosecutors asked that I express my concerns about Mr. Epstein in a letter addressed to them. I sent that letter on July 3.2008 detailing the reasons why federal prosecution of Mr. Epstein were extremely important for the safety of children. This exercise was obviously fullie,.especiaty In light of the fact that the plea to welch Epstein had already entered brought on end to any chance of federal prosecution. On July 7, 2008, while under the mistaken belief (along with my dents) that a federal plea deal was imminent and should be slopped - at least to give my chants a chance to fast confer with the prosecutor as to the terms of the plea deal - I filed a petition alleging that Jane Doe No. 1 was a victim of federal sex crimes committed by Epstein and that the United States was wrongfully excluding her from plea negotiations. We also alleged that the prosecutors had violated her rights under the r4Ime Victims' Rights Act ICVRA) — specifically her rights to confer with federal prosecutors, to be treated with fairness, to receive timely notice of relevant court proceedings, and to receive information about restitution. The United States response was the first time we realized that there was no imminent federal plea to stop - the deal had already been done. By telling my clients to be patient, and by having me spend lime writing letters about the need to prosecute Mr Ensteln the United States had effectively run out the clock on my clients' rights. Remarkably, the United Stales, in its pleadings, defended the °legations that it had violated the victims' rights byclaiming the Act did not apply to pre-indictment negoliehons with potential federal defendants; therefore, the victims' 'rights' had never been triggered and thus could not have been violated. The defense was that the victims had no rights...despite the CVRA. After Jane Doe No. 2 joined the initial petition, the district cowl (Mane J ) found that both women qualified as `crime victims' under the Act. The district court later rejected the Government's argument that the CVRA only apples after a federal criminal indictment has been filed. Among other relief, we sought rescission of the non-prosecution agreement as a remedy for the violation of the victims' rights. To make the case for such a remedy, we moved for discovery of the correspondence between the United States are Epstein's attorneys during the plea negotiations. Epstein's attorneys intervened, arguing that Federal Rule of Evidence 410 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 create a privilege for plea negotiations blocking release of the correspondence. They also argued that the cowl should find that the materials were protected under the work product doctrine or. alternatively, should be protected under a new 'common-taw privilege for plea negotiations' Yes, Epstein's defense attorneys argued al the Distnct level and appellate level that absolute cordidentiality should exist between defendants and prosecutors to the exclusion of everyone • including the victims of the crime. The district court lirsl cued that rescission of the olea aoreement viaS a possible remedy under the Act The court then riled that we were entitled to review the correspondence, rejecting all of Epstein's arguments. On Friday, the Eleventh Circuit pffirmed the district courts decision At pp. 18-22, the Circuit concluded that there was no basis for restricting access to the correspondence when the victims had a legitimate need to review. The Cirtadt rejected, for example, the work product argument: Disclosure of work-product materials to an adversarywaives the work-product privilege. See, e.g., In re Chrysler Motors Corp. Overnight Evaluation Program Litig., 860 F.2d 844, 846 (8th Cir. 1988); In re Doe, 662 F2d 1073, 1081-82 (4th Cir. 1981). Even if it shared the common goal of reaching a quick settlement, the United States was undoubtedly adverse to Epstein during Its Investigation of him for federal offenses, and the Intervenors disclosure of their work product waived any claim of privilege. .. The Circuit also declined to recognize a new privilege for 'plea bargaining': As a last-dilch effort, the Intervenors contend %atilt( more is needed In addition to the plain language of Rule 410 to preclude disclosure of the correspondence to plaintiffs, it can be found in the conjunction of Rule 410, the work-product privilege, and the Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel in the plea bargaining process: but this novel argument falls too. As explained above. Rule 410 does not create a privilege and the Intervenors waived any work-product privilege. The intervenors concede too that the right to counsel under the sixth Amendment had not yet attached when the correspondence was exchanged. Lumley. City of Dade City, Fla., 327 F.3d 1186, 1195 (11th Cl;. 2003) (Vibe Sixth Amendment right to counsel ordinarilydoes not arise until there is a formal commitment by the government to prosecute,' such as reformat charge. preliminaryhearing, indictment information or arraignment?). The 'conjunctive' power of three fake claims of privilege does not rescue the correspondence from disclosure.. . . The Supreme Court has Identified several considerations relevant to whether a court should recognize an evidentiary privilege—the needs of the public, whether the privilege Is rooted in the Imperative for confidence and Mist, the evidentiary benefit of the denial of the privilege, and any consensus among the slates, Jaffee I Redmond, 518 U.S. 1, 10-15, 116 S. CI. 1923, 1928-31 (1996)—IM none of these considerations weighs in favor of recognizing a now privilege to prevent discovery of the plea negotiations. Although plea negotiations are vital to the functioning of the criminal justice system, a prosecutor and target of a criminal investigationdo not enjoy a relationship of confidence arid trust when they negotiate. Their adversarial relationship, unlike the confidential relationship of a doctor and patent or attorney and client, warrants no privilege beyond the terms of Rtle 410. See Jaffee. 518 U.S. at 10, 116 S. Cf. at 1928. But the victims would enjoy an evidentiary benefit from the disclosure of plea negotiations to prove whether the United States violated their rights under the Act The bigger Issue is whether the Crime Victims' Rights Act Is going to be taken seriously by prosecutors and the courts. We have a very strong case that, prodded by Epstein, the federal prosecutors deliberately concealed the sweetheart plea deal they had cooked up with him to avoid public criticism of the deal. But the CVRA was the law of the land and required the prosecutors to confer with the victims about the deal • before It was made. I am hopeful that this "ease stbstarillates and advances the rights of crime victims In the criminal hdprmw,vpathic{usuce.ccnvticoartraissurAppeals-Courtaties-in-Faor-olcrirne-trictirns•Rightafrolegisterecf-PetbratioJetfreyE•Epstein•Caseif.u2On... 34 EFTA00191319 • svto€ase 9:08-cv-80736peatdotaawareatotilan5ActEcitesedraegRix5ThelisakettrgilliRaillast Page 12 of process al an early stage. and that ultimately the violation of our car& rights in this case can be resurrected through the invaIdation of this agreement that was reached In violation of their rights. Tags: Crime Victims Rights.m1 QM Jeffrey E Epstein Florida Recustered Sexual Offender Post Comment Name Email Website (optional) Comment Allowed tags: <a> link. Kb> bold. 4i> italics O Receive email when someone replies. O Subscribe to this biog by email. Post Conmena (0 2014 Fanner, Jaffe. Weissing. Edwards. %los S Lehrman P.L. AI rights reserved.Ssemap Legat Disdeener Your Path to Justice Begins andEnds With Us! • Mom • About Its • Practice Ares • Attorneys • emienavidia • Foci:m(O4s • Eikv • ¢nnlael 114 OD 2013 • Path To Justice FARMER, JAFFE. WEISSING, EDWARDS, FISTOS 8 LEHRMAN, P.1., 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2. Fon Lauderdale. FL 33301 htip /NAsw pathlofusbcacarrtioakid/343584/Appeals•Court-Pules-tn-Finor-of•C/Ime-VictIms-Rights-In-Registered-Pedaphile-JeffrerBEpSleInCase/I.U20n, 414 EFTA00191320 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT 1 EFTA00191321 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 2 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE # I and JANE DOE #2, Plantiffs, 1. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant, ROY BLACK, et al., Intervenors PROPOSED ORDER OF CONFIDENTIALITY ("PROTECTIVE ORDER") THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Intervenors' Motion Fora Protective Confidentiality Order and Incorporated Memorandum ofLaw. For the reasons that the Court will set forth in a separate forthcoming Order, the motion is hereby GRANTED. Now, therefore, it is ORDERED that: 1. This Protective Order applies to all correspondence between the United States Attorney's Office and the intervenors, including any attachments thereto, that was the subject of the Court's Order of June 18, 2013 (Doc. 188), hereinafter referred to as the "Confidential Discovery Material" or "CDM." 2. The parties shall designate the CDM by marking them on the face of the writing: EFTA00191322 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 3 of 9 CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO STIPULATION AND ORDER OF CONFIDENTIALITY. The marking shall be affixed in such a manner as not to obliterate or obscure any written matter. With respect to discovery materials produced electronically, the designation of Confidential may be made on the outside of the disk or cd. 3. In the event that the Producing Party inadvertently fails to designate any CDM as confidential in this Action, it may make such designation subsequently by notifying all parties to whom such discovery material was produced, in writing as soon as practicable. After receipt of such notification, the parties to whom production has been made will treat the discovery material and all copies as having been designated as CDM. 4. The parties agree that the CDM, or any summary thereof, shall be used solely for the purpose of this Action and for no other purpose without prior written approval from the Court or the prior written consent of the Producing Party and the Intervenors. All persons receiving or given access to CDM in accordance with the terms of this Protective Order consent to the continuing jurisdiction of this Court for the purposes of enforcing this Protective Order and remedying any violations thereof. 5. a. CDM shall not be disclosed to anyone other than the following categories of persons: (i) The Court (and any appellate court), including court personnel. -2- EFTA00191323 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 4 of 9 (ii) Court reporters (including persons operating video recording equipment at depositions) and person preparing transcripts of testimony to the extent necessary to prepare such transcripts, with the consent of counsel. (iii) Plaintiffs' attorneys who appear as counsel of record in this case, including the attached list of paralegals, clerical, secretarial and other staff employed or retained by such counsel, provided that such staff and employees also comply with the provisions of Paragraph 6 hereof. (iv) Retained consulting or testifying experts, advisors and consultants, including persons directly employed by such experts, advisors and consultants (collectively "experts") but only to the extent necessary to perform their work in connection with this Action. (I) Any additional persons as counsel for the parties and Intervenors shall consent to in writing before the proposed disclosures. b. All parties and their respective counsel, paralegals and employees and assistants of all counsel receiving the CDM shall take all steps reasonably necessary to prevent disclosure of the CDM other than in accordance with the terms of this Protective Order. c. Disclosure of the CDM other than in accordance with the terms of this Protective Order may subject the disclosing person to such sanctions and remedies as this Court may deem appropriate, including without limitation, contempt, injunctive relief and damages. -3- EFTA00191324 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 5 of 9 6. No copies of any CDM shall be made or delivered to any person other than those categories of persons referred to in paragraph 5 above, and even then only in accordance with paragraphs 7 and 8 herein. 7. CDM may only be disclosed to persons who are not included in those categories referred to in paragraph 5.a. above, upon prior written consent of the Producing Party's and Intervenors' counsel. If either the Producing Party's counsel or the Intervenors' counsel refuses to give consent, the CDM shall not be disclosed. The Receiving Parties may apply to the Court for an order of relief, on notice to the Producing Party and Intervenors. 8. Any person referred to in paragraphs 5.a.iii through 51 above who is furnished a copy of any CDM shall first be given a copy of this Protective Order and required to read it and be bound by its terms. 9. At any time during this Action, the Receiving Parties may challenge the designation of CDM as confidential by written notice to the Producing Party's counsel and counsel for the Intervenors specifying by exact bates number the materials in dispute and the precise nature of the dispute with regard to each document or portion thereof. The parties and Intervenors shall have twenty (20) days from receipt of the written notice to determine if the dispute can be resolved without judicial intervention and, if not, the Receiving Parties amy move for an Order removing the confidential designation. The Receiving Parties shall have the burden of proof on such a motion to establish good cause for removing the confidential designation and treatment. -4- EFTA00191325 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 6 of 9 10. No party shall be obligated to challenge the propriety of any designation, and a failure to do so shall not preclude a subsequent challenge on the propriety of such designation and shall not constitute an admission that any information is, in fact, confidential. I I. In the event a party seeks to file any pleading, brief or memorandum or other document purporting to reproduce, paraphrase or summarize any CDM or portions thereof, that party shall take appropriate action to insure that the documents receive proper protection from public disclosure and shall seek leave of Court to file the document under seal in accordance with Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. 12. a. In the event that a party intends to file CDM with the Court in support of, or in opposition to, a non-discovery motion (e.g. motion for summary judgment or any other dispositive or substantive motion), the filing party shall take appropriate action to insure that the documents receive proper protection from public disclosure and shall seek leave of Court to file the document under seal in accordance with the local rules. b. The non-discovery motion filing and briefing schedule shall be adjusted and tolled to provide sufficient time for the Court to consider and rule on the motion seeking permission to file the document(s) under seal. c. Once the matter has been resolved, the filing party may file the document(s) in accordance with the parties' and Intervenors' agreement and/or the Court's instructions, as applicable. -5- EFTA00191326 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 7 of 9 13. The CDM and/or other papers which are filed under seal shall be kept under seal until further order of the Court; however, said CDM and other papers filed under seal shall be available to the Court and counsel of record, and to all other persons entitled to receive the confidential information contained therein under the terms of this Protective Order. 14. This Protective Order is intended to provide a mechanism for the handling of the CDM and is not intended to imply that any CDM is relevant or admissible in this Action or any other litigation. Any party may move for relief from, or general or particular modification of, the mechanism for maintaining confidentiality herein set forth, or the application of this Protective Order in any particular circumstance, and each party specifically reserves all rights to object to the relevance or admissibility of any information produced in accordance with this Protective Order on any grounds it may deem appropriate. 15. If a party receiving CDM in accordance with the terms of this Protective Order is served with a subpoena or other process by any court, administrative or legislative body, or any other person or organization which calls for the production of any CDM, the party to whom the subpoena or other process is directed shall, within two business days of its service, notify the opposing party or parties and the Intervenors of the pendency of such subpoena or order and provide them with a copy of the subpoena or process and the date by which compliance is requested. Any party or the Intervenors opposing the production of the -6- EFTA00191327 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 8 of 9 information demanded in the subpoena or process shall notify the party served of its objections as early as possible prior to the requested compliance date. 16. This Protective Order may be amended with leave of Court, by the agreement of counsel for the parties and intervenors in the form of a stipulation submitted to the Court for approval, or by the Court sua sponte after affording the parties and Intervenors the opportunity to be heard. If the parties and Intervenors cannot agree to an amendment, then a formal motion to amend must be filed with the Court. This Protective Order is intended to regulate the handling of CDM and documents during this litigation, but shall remain in full force and effect until modified, superseded or terminated on the record by agreement of the parties thereto or by order of the Court. 17. All counsel of record in this Action shall make a good faith effort to comply with the provisions of this Protective Order and to ensure that their agents, employees and clients do so as well. In the event of a change of counsel, retiring counsel shall notify new counsel of their responsibilities under this Order. 18. This Protective Order does not restrict or limit the use of CDM at any hearing or trial, which may be the subject of a further protective order and/or appropriate court orders. Prior to any hearing or trial at which the use of CDM is anticipated, the parties and Intervenors shall meet and confer regarding the use of the CDM. If the parties and Intervenors cannot agree, the parties and Intervenors shall request the Court to rule on such procedures. Notwithstanding, this Protective Order shall remain in full force and effect until -7- EFTA00191328 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 9 of 9 modified, superseded, terminated on the record by agreement of the parties and Intervenors or by order of the Court. 19. Within sixty (60) days after the conclusion of this Action, whether by judgment, settlement or otherwise, including conclusion of any appeal, all CDM including but not limited to materials furnished to consultants and/or experts shall be returned to the Producing Party unless the parties stipulate to destruction in lieu of return; provided, however, that counsel of record in this case may retain for their files, copies of any of their work product, pleadings, court filings, brief, and exhibits, which incorporate or contain documents, information or material designated as "CONFIDENTIAL". 20. Upon final termination of this Action, whether by judgment, settlement or otherwise, including all appeals, the Clerk of the Court shall return to counsel for the parties, or destroy, any materials filed under seal. Before destroying any document filed under seal, the Clerk of Court shall advise all parties of their option to accept return or destruction and shall allow no less than thirty (30) days from issuance of the notice for counsel to respond. In the absence of a response, the Clerk of Court may destroy documents filed under seal. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Florida, this day of May, 2014. Kenneth Marra United States District Judge cc: All counsel -8- EFTA00191329 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 1 of 22 COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 2 EFTA00191330 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247.2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 2 of 22 Attorneys Say Miami Prosecutes Violated cam Metals' RIghtS Act I Main Justice 4/2/11 I SR PM JEGOTIATING WITH THE DOJ: N1MAw JUSTICE Warend iTRATEGIES FOR OPTIMAL RESULTS Lawyers with Wji nbr. BRACEWELL FREE Webinar - Wed., April 13 &GIULIANI 00.1Experience Abc...1 Vol Lin'? • :v...p .f.seatar VIN JUSTICE GO (TICS. POLICY AND Trif - riusrJOBS1 ANTI-001 11ROPTON orneys Say Miami Prosecutors Violated Crime Victims' Rights Act US. At TOItUGYS CHAR! hoteractIv0) 'rename Arno/how I March 22. 2011 11:52 am ww• Printable Voltam we attorneys for two girls who wand they ant eattultal by bilhonolre end thgrasikepdnle Mae sex °Render Jeffrey Epstein Mod cowl gapers on Monday canting PO l*.it ' ...mirte“ily en.le.s. a id vio YS i/ ... Al. linty [ laffl,:dr., wtl, Hu:I, liol•tt.4n,o am/ 01::imn IU S Attorneys Once Mol sled the Cure Vlalme' RION. An by scan • ronprosecubon Kreitman, et' Elmeln ..-------___I ut nothing them Me Pete Beach oily News mooned i Epstein served 13 months In Jail tom June 2004 to My 2003 a one stele count of &Magna sit ;,, : .s....- - en unchrego go for prosbamo Aa • town he Is maned to register es a set oftener he wan" proteada foe edadonal chops mote then 40 glee under the ego of 16 ssy tag tame to He home and gave him manages During thorium/men they say he masirbeted Providln9 stlints with proven and away esstaied them experience and Innovative solutions ..- . . ., n x compliance and to comple ain...../.. Bred Edwards and Paul Cased. Hamra representen woof hn alleged Mcdms. My In enlorcementh sties Inside the the nog that tie U B Attaney's ofce for the Southern Ol sat of %doe of tieutwaotohr Beltway and around the globe. r falai f' •i misled the stares by tang them there wee en ongoing Imrnagelten Into their clans However. May say. the once was emceeing the tact Mat they needy herd signed • olio *Comsat talertt. osoeman deal MT Epstein sollegragMen• -Ong to Me modem the U S Attomays *Mat In Janata 2008 and May 2000 sent Us* notecotton' 'mania to ins Mined Maims laying 'Pas Carl Hanna under Investlgean ' HINiever. Si. taco had signed the agreement !par In September 2007 COVI NGTON _ • _ Montoya weal a court heeded during which ltwr NI) ask MN ma agreement be onviralsted hawse N Nano the COVINGTON 6 BURLING LIP is' rights In the motion at attorneys clakn the egnawat Is Ono, because me government Old not rimed the pessienady mandated rights of maims before n entered Mrs agreement' Recognized for Its Leading Ogg mints the request. Epskin add be charged by the U.S Altman office if he were charged sal ocartted on White Collar Crime and al charges. he could be sentenced to 10 years to Me for nth Omega Anti-Corruption Practices by Chambers and Lege/ 500 'MC to the meat 'The CO/ reason that the (U 9 Morsels splice) concealed the existence of me non-pro socutIon event from the Maim* was nol to cony)/ with 001710 opal reselcion dA newt lo men a firestorm of pima nay that would have Masted II ths sweetheart plea deal rim • pancally connected billonalre had been revealed' I Volk, special counsel for me U S Attorneys Office Southern 19selet re Fronde. In en oral to the newspaper that the thrcistrate about who, u hrnt and In v anceneYs ace wall respond in court flings In amoral., hour idwita. 'fern • and ever. le we staled more then two years ago in July 2009 In our 'itemise to the prelritiffa than-emergency imam lot runt rem ain—Ith• repeat Huffily ra the rrornare ontnell Attorney General cement of the Cane Viclin Rights Ad. the CVFtA was not tiOlstorl becthise no federal charges wore ever gad In tea &ft lfolder cluatssino pressurft front iern Memo of Florae.' Vale said 'Because the menet remains pending In cowl. It would be Inappromfata at Ms time numbers of(bosom to OMIT,* note 000110nel comment on Me merits d the current motion Kband Sin Ituhanantal Won: aeon pnCITC military commission rather than in Mtp thytvw.rnalniestlet com/2011/03/227attorneyS-tay-mlaml-pfoseCut00-vfolated-crfan-sittlmS' -dghls-aet/ Page 1or 2 EFTA00191331 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 3 of 22 Monkeys Say Miami Prosecutors Violated Crime Victims' Eights Mi I Main JuMkt 417/11 1 38 Pal ytt... e.t.a fr iend court was To Top Non Noll, Heed Far DOJ Crime Menu Poll vanakees Bemoan Lack of Funding For Plains' Ripens newt°. Who VIolatod Ryas 01 Clank Stoup) by Mellen le Now LI S Alicant, metallic Honor VIceoled Seim of E lemon Lows. LA Proaoculoas Soy dotal Proem-bloc Modeled Laws, filet. Rubs In 201 Cases Since 1990. Study Finds LJ Ps gotta, Memo, Gemmel Tom Pamela Speak* et mr Oopertniont of Educationai024 Oander•O•sod IlDER POST NEWER POST Violence Summit PT, Age RIMS, to HMO Eriofto ADA Proles:rids tot Fdeinitl Stinict Futon Kontos t) S Awner WPM Mott Convene Tea nology INC. Apt**, to Pay 11.2 lati2GLI LitiTegi Million Penalty so Resolve Violation/I of Duo Fon0fin Comp) Pitched* Mt Mtemoy Consul Eric Holder Speaks ei Halloo& Mean alerwetafittio Monad Como mien nets an dosed Shenandoah. PenneyNenln Men Smarmed Id Involvement In Ihe Fatal loan% al lute Remlat New Put ey Wastewater 'esteem end CMmkal Suppty Company and Owner Sentenced lor TMle Rote In Freud Conspiracy Alebetne Doctor and Husband Gouged with Tax Evasion Tell Defender,' Imacled lor Mop Fable Liens ter Nikons of Doan Againel f Semi Lan Enlacement JOC Codpeenlon Rstofro• Fear CorrOPI Pinata. Ml Innietigition end Arcs to Pey a sill" Million Criminal Penalty Attorney Caner', Edo Holder Speaks el National Precuts on Youth Violent,' Prevention Sum roll Ft.. Individuals lowSeliod for Alleged Roles In Scheme to Danko Moron ProoleIng MilthIng Fund. COntrIbvIlOin to NomProill Onsenlmilon Department of JualIce Mourn Judiciary Committee Office of Goyentinam Elhtca Olfito of Lewd Counsel Orb* of Proleaedonat liraponstrity Senile Judklaty Committee, ne l Moue 1 Adverb** I Job. I Privacy Polity I TOnin M Res Copyright CI 201' WDC Medle Lie htip://www.malnJusOce.tomi2011/03/22/atiorneys-say-mlami-promutors-vlolated-crIme-vIcilmr -rights-act/ Page 2 of 2 EFTA00191332 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 4 of 22 Attorneys want Jeffrey Epstein agreement thrown out 4/7/11 1'.37 Fel JUST A CLICK AWAYt 5:-.0e;iteinfiStirclinv PalmBeoaDaityNew • .com Home > Pains Beach Nov. Attorneys want Jeffrey Epstein agreement thrown out Vita Stert:n Cl YAKOOI LATEST NEWS Sy MICHELE DAMAN okay NEWS SWF WRITER PALM BEACH ESTATE Today thundery Apal 7. Updeled:94s am Wednesday Much at all 201i • • 44 la. Peon/ 7.21 p m. Monist Math al. 2011 Yak at Soo CS Gstago lo lot in on nonwalca E fiery I NM I Share I mono Two • Palm Roach Women's Intemolleoat /Pm Festival freewill Tourcrlay N luppen or Court papers Ned Monday say the U.S. Attorneys Office violated tho Crime Violins' Rights Mt by signing a nonprosecution d :;fr•:" rat women Illalmaktes agreement with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein without notifying his victims Day Academy ;omits I oosa 241 La Puerta Way. Palm Beach notable cOmoclort In Palm Attorneys Bad Edwards and Paul Cane, representing Jane Doe Csaudilely designed Alednef sancta Palm Oran Beath 'ovary 1/1 and Jane Doe fr2, went a court hearing, where they will ask that ogled estate. Ps Mole Details Gov Soon M Midtown the agreement be invalidated because, they say, the victims' nghts Beath *Qv* mo Ito MP' In were violated II that happens, it could open up the 93-year•td torcoran.com ICUS eff.0.115 JINNI beach Palm Beath billionaire toe slew ol federal charges involving sex cancans crimes with minors that were set 05100 by the agreement. 0 The motion. Nod Monday in federal court In West Palm Beach. accuses the U.S Attorney's Office ol deliberately misleading the victims by taloa them the Investigation was ongoing. wheal kt,Clickhere fur the latest Weide :1/4 concealing they had already sgnod a deal with Epstein According to the motion, the U S Attorneys Office sent 'false Find us em Fatebook letters In January 2008 and May 2008 to the victims saying lIthlIS case is currently under investigation' after the Palm Beach Daily News government had signed the agreement w.lh Epstein In September 2007 Like 'The only reason that the (U S Attorneys Office) concealed the 2.113 peoplt PYe Palm Nach Daily Paws existence of the nonprosocut/on agreement from the victims was not to comply w.th some legal restriction, but rather to avoid a firestorm of public Conyovorsy that would have erupted If Me sweetheart area deal with a po Ideally connected billionaire had been It revealed.' the motion says. II Epstein were found Diary on federal charges. statutory pona'tles ranged from 10 years to We CritMIVIS Instead the sealed pact was part and parcel of Epsleln's acceptance of a stale plea deal where he received en IBmonth habit Sentence for sorolling a minor for prostitution and soliciting prostaulOn He served 13 months segregated In a vacant wing of MOST RECENT *LAMAS the county stockade and was lel out on work rtease six days a week for up to 16 haws a day Edwards and other attorneys fought In court for a year before successfully gelling the agreement unsealed In September 2009 More Man 30 minor gins ware klentified as Easton s victims in the Pie IN 11....4ly of Ma P••••••Pals..1 nara I 004r3 hits An, Imam Mtp rfminv.paimbeachdallynews.cominewstatterneys-want Jeffrey-epsteln-agreement-thrown-out• 1338111.Mml Page 1 of 3 EFTA00191333 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 5 of 22 Attorneys want Jeffrey Epstein agreement thrown out 417111 3 37 PM Almon4 Doe I and 2, who were 14 and 13. respectively. al the limo of the Incidents, received monetary settlements in civil cases. They am among more than two-dozen underage girls who Plod lawsuits or settled claims against Epstein. alleging they wore lured to his Palm Beach mansion to gem him sexually charged massages and/or sex In exchange for money. The motion feed Monday says the agreement Is illegal because the government did not protect the tongressIonatly mandeled rights of victims before it entered this agreement' Aticia Valle, special counsel for the U.S. Attorney's Office Southern District of Florida. sald in on e•mall that the U.S. Attorneys Ofece will respond In court feings. 'However, as we slated more than two years ago in July 20O8 in our response to the plaintiffs' thenemergency petition for enforcement of the Crime Victim Rights Act, the CVRA was not violated because no federal charges were ever filed in the Southern District of Florida.' Valle said. 'Because the matter remains pending In coon, it would be Inappropriate allies lime to provide additional comment on the merits of the current motion' The attorneys reference e-mells and letters from the federal office in Epsteins lawyers acknowledging the government's legal obligation to Inform victims about the pact The entails are redacted In the motion because they are under set The attorneys filed a separate motion Monday to unseal the correspondence. 'The reasonable Inference from the evidence Is that the U S Attorney's Office wanted to keep the agreement a secret to avoid intense criticism that would surely ensued had the victims and the public learned that a billionaire sex offender with political connections had arranged to avoid federal prosecution for numerous felony sex offenses against manor girls.' the motion says 'As part of this pattern of deception, the U.S. Attorney's Office discussed victim notification with the defendant sex offender and. niter he raised objections. slopped making notilleatIons.* Epstein sought 'a higher level of review' within the Department of Justice the motion says. 'A reasonable inference Irons the evidence is that Epstein used his sirlicani pol.lical and social connections to kitty the Justice Department to avoid significant federal prosecution' the motion states shed this article. COMMENTS Centime's are closed last's 541007. WeitAllitil AMU ADVCRInt inCIAl. IltrtsSois Rosen avd•I !MOM An. C04,4•• ClaVall Pal, awn Uhl 4tH'.. Isdal Weeds I wi t 0 Lomplai 0011118510 SaltHebn Unite Avef,taw• • 'Owl, Pinfi•P•1040.th 'AVOW MU bolos f 40 I O, USLITIII3 (henna.* L•CIUM Liocl.0 Plapoba /••10ip. Comae. OVS.C3.1 AIWY•t••••0114. OepeSi• •Seriers' il.i• loon Caw , WILTON 01.0C il Faa4 54 4Oul la 14...• fweil GM 'WI Ile tlan• Cnna• NIS Meth Annus Privacy Peksi Pimp re Sim C011faielt, hot MM V. C.n.,6r* 0 (browny Math 0 lrlfle.tella fait,. thitnor Ari.n•M illemalif• 111•101, Slafi“ • Loatp tet...... Milt (SIAM hap'//www.palmbeachdallyneed.cominemiallomeysmanhjeffieyseptleinragreemant•thrownsout•1338I11.html Page a of 3 EFTA00191334 ' Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 6 of 22 Attorney% want Jeffray fpsDin agreement throw" out 4O/11 1 37 PM Coppgret 0 Thu Apr 07 13 33 34 EDT 7011 M ogles reserved By tory PekreeechOelgtferte con. you accept the leans el out Pella ogeeerneof Plans° Joao N Conrad PalnekocliDarefelcncs corn I Privacy Policy J About our ode VatItAIZED C0t1E9. 7t70 http //www.palrnbeeChdillyiltivS.COM/ntersfaltorneys -went -Jelfretr- 1P1lehl-MlfeeMent- threwrl'aut-7338111•DITM Page 3 al 3 EFTA00191335 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 7 of 22 News Reports about Billionaire Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Highlight the Importance of Vi. . Page I of 3 BRIEFINGWIRE kin I Le2l.n. A net) Prvss Release. Websilu • Briefing Search •Adt by Coo* Author Details Keywartl: Find a Lawyer - Free lalithlati.SW22 Caiegwy Free, Confidential 0 moat OtL1 Lawyer Locator. Save Time - Describe Your (Steen Search Case Nowt News Reports about watt.. Lcsaihtnet!, Billionaire Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Highlight the Mk a Lawyer Online §yemil Your Press Reins@ Importance of Victims Rights tan Blz Ofretioni Hundreds or news articles have reported 27 Lawyers Online JtSS Feed 0 billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's close relationship with Britain's Pr rce Now Answer Your Quest ons In Minutes VED Tog Andrew Attorney Brad Edwards has eArnwe• cani/Liw Questions? pursued victim rights cases on ballad of ten women who were sexually molested Sexual Abuse by Epstein Alienation We wrote the book on defending false molestation allegations Ask a Lawyer Online Now www rohnbuse tan 12 Lawyers Are Online. nrel 1-Day Current Wait Time: 14 Counting Minutes Up to 90% Off the LAW JumAnawac JIM Best Stuff To Dol Restaurants, Spas, Events and More. ww.v.1.1a;43Soclol.aim 3 El Me by Coo& pnorinaWiro corn. 3/0812011 - Contact The plena Scrum Employment screening Farmer, Jaffe. WeissIng, Edwards. Fistos tool. Help prevent 8, Lehrman, P.L. child molestation. €11•1118SC/Cf11. mm (954) 524-2820 Kim Sa le. BARD MarkelMg/PR (561)637-2575 Fort Lauderdale, FL -- In the last week. hundreds of news erne n have reported billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epsteln's close relationship with Britain's Prince Andrew. Attorney Brad Edwards has pursued want rights Cases On behalf of len women who, between 12 end 15 years of age, were sexually molested and abused by Epstein. The atones of their abuse have ei the trappings of a Hollywood movie, including posh settings http://www.briefingwire.comiviewBriefing.aspeidt‘24907 EFTA00191336 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 8 of 22 News Reports about Billionaire Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Highlight the Importance of VI... Page 2 of 3 at Epstein's Paim Beach Mansion, private Caribbean island and his Jet. But Epstein's heinous sexual abuse of these victims Is no fiction. Edwards successtuny represented these women, obtaining Justice for each of them, by proving that Epstein end his internettonal sex trafficking criminal enterprise exploited them and hundreds of other underage girls. This recent wave of news coverage highlight the importance of the victims rights work that Attorney Edwards does on behalf of victims of sexual molestation and other sexual abuse. Edwards conducts extensive Investigations and pursues civil lawsuits against sexual predators to protect the rights of his victim clients and to hold sexual predators, like Epstein, accountable. Many sexual predators, like Epstein, are wealthy and powerful and able to focus vest resources and high profile legal teams in an attempt to deflect attention, avoid criminal liability, and deny Justice to their victims. Speaking of his work on the Epstein cases, Edwards says "we took on powerful people and sought to level the playing field to protect victims.' Representing these women has made Edwards aware that child sexual abuse is extremely prevalent. According to a U.S. Health and Human Services study, more then 83,000 substantiated reports of sexually abused children were made In 2006 stone. The actual number of incidents of sexual abuse is likely much higher because II is believed that sexual abuse, especially amongst children, is significantly underreported. Edwards hopes that the media attention focused on Epstein's sexual abuse will "inspire victims to report these crimes" and will convey his beaarthat victims rights cases can effectively protect their rights, maintain their anonymity, and hold predators accountable.' Farmer, Jaffe, Waging, Edwards, Piste's Lehman, P.L , a Fort Lauderdale Litigation firm, focuses on Consumer Class Actions, Sexual Abuse Cases as well as other significant Personal inlury, Wrongful Death, and Whistlebiower Suits (qul tem). The firm is headquartered at 425 N. Andrews Avenue, Suite 2, Fort http://www.briefingwirc.com/viewBriefing.aspeid-24902 5/2/2011 EFTA00191337 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 9 of 22 News Reports about Billionaire Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein Highlight the Importance of Vi. . Page 3 of 3 Lauderdale, Florida 33301 and may be reached at (800)400-1098 or (964) 624- 2820 Additional information about Brad Edwards or Farmer, Jaffe, Welssing, Edwards, Fistos 8 Lehrman. P.L. may be obtained from the fires webalte at swAv palhlotustIce com. FAQ4 I Contact Us I Terme 8 Conditions I Privacy Policy O NOD OdeingVAte LLC httpl/www.briefingwire.comiviewBriefing.asmaid=24907 5(2/201) EFTA00191338 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 10 of 22 Palm Beach Daily News ArcNye; Will 1 35 PM ao ne,r rgifc. 0 f 0 0 pernets10014201 p Search for Palm Beach Daly News Follow eShinySheol Lia4leak41 ElectronicClick Edition Now Available! 1 co (mita Here To Subscribe NEWS crosslitsas Hoer I Arc hi (is ',ie a Print Ns wigs 7t' most popular Adverts@ 11 Automotive -3 New Search Reeve to teems Porno Friendly About your archives purchase: Your pun:hase of 20 elides expires on 0410712011 4:22 PM You nevi viewed 3 irides and have 17 rides remaining Palm Beach Dilly News (FL) JUDGE RECEIVES EPSTEIN TAPE RULING PENDING MICHELE OARGAN, Daily News Staff Writer Published' May 5, 2010 NEW YORK — A Manhattan federal between veteran newts rter Way Wok Into custody • lapsrocorted conversation Rush end convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. DLE(CT by But U S DINO Judge. eons reserved ruling on whether the recording wet be released to Shannon Donnelly • Wormy* representing n who were sexually abused by Epstein as rNnors. McKenna Sin', Ils/en to the recording dung the hearing. Fort Lauderdale °Homey Bred Edwards arid Utah attorney and law professor Pail Cassel are fIghtng lo obtain the 22.mlnLie tape on behalf of Epstein victim Jane Doe. She has Ned one of • dozen pending off cases in fedora! court In West Palm Beech egstral Epstein. A status check Is sat for Thursday In those cases baton U.S. District Judge Kenneth Mena. Doe could have sallied the lawsuit for 150.000 but is asking for S50 miler, In damages. Cassel said Tuesday. 'Jane Doe was repeatedly sexually esseulled over a lengthy period of erne by this wealthy and powerful man,' Cassell said. Epstein, 57, Is cunently under house arrest n his Palm Beach horns eller seMng 13 months of en 18. model stale sentence for soliciting a minor tor proOlulion and scatting prostitution. Nearly Iwo dozen young women have filed lawsuit. against the b IllonaVe money manager •• some already aided — el alleging Epstein sexually abused them et minors al Ns El Brio Way home. Cites mponeffs protected erioffiEN Rush. of the New York Deity News, was present in the courtroom, but did not haw to Ms* Tuesday. Neither did Fort Lauderdale private Investigator Michael Flsten, also In the courtroom. Working on belief of Epstein victims, Fitton discovered the existence of ihe tape and had e conversation with Rush ebout its contents. Representing Rush and the newspaper. Washington ettomey Laura Hindman and New York Daly News ettomey Ame Carroll argued the tape florid !VI be retested under any circumstances, citing reporter's protected pdvilege. Rush told Epstein the conversation wee 'off the record' end has never published any gallon 04 leer conversation. But even If portions had been printed. the unpublished portions would still be protected, Mondrian bid. Hindman cited cases where Interviews were conducted in the presence of other people and ladelilige was not waned In addition. Handmen argued that Rush should not have to testify In court. The Willy for fanners pelvises to be protected is crucial In culling semis' and gathering information tor news Correa Hindman said Reporting is all about give and take between the reporter end the source. Mars what reporter, have to do, Hardman said. This a so critical to news gathering.' Hardman said. 'Mr. Rush OWN And himself testifying In !many) cases psi because he hid the temerity 10 do some reporting an • yew Imperial slory.' There a nothing helpful to Does case on the tape and 'lane Doe Is not referred to once In that Npe.' Hardman said. Caned argued that the laps Is %Nicer in showing Epstelne lack el remorse,' Cassell described Epstein as a pitiless sexual abuser to Janet/co siva al least 30 other minor gins Even though Jane Doe Is not mired to by name on the laps Epstein miens to ass victims as 'the girls' and makes disparaging remarks about them on Ihe laps. Cassell said. Tope played for others Cassel said privilege does not apply because It was waived when Rush played the tape for three people and verbally divulged Its contents to two others, Including li sten and Edwards. who also represents two other victims. But even if them is 'qualified NM age,' Cowell Gays II a outweighed by Doe's Mobility to obtain the information anywhere else and the Nile need to hear Epstein's own words about Ms lack of remorse. Since Epstein has exercised Ns Fifth Amendment right during questioning by victims' attorneys. the jury Mop //nt.newsbank.com/ni fearchiare/Atthereap.aalOnedinerp.dOCI .ernaine-dkleSped.K0atintld-AC011104062022101226,61,upgradeableeno Page 1 or EFTA00191339 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 11 of 22 PAT Beach Daily News: Archives 4/7/11 1 35 PM wet hive no odor way to hew Cps.In's words In his &snooks, Cassell said. Deadline for discovery In the Doe rose le May 31. with the plat sal * July t4. mdergenapbdellynews.com Copyright (c) 2010 Pa* Beach Daly News Ilanallaans s 160,000 Manage for 6659/mo. No SSN reg LIMAGO.00frVM041tne latn211111etazinamancs we roung out row savers am get www.hrwo***** Innen avert flan "Cheats' Credit Scene He Added 126 PoIn To HN Cradle Soon wwworenrerewrrometworom inak207artailinkU Make 579/hr waiting from MOM As seen on wwwweikkOMPIMAINIC Attip*S a_CjItinn C hup://ni.newsbank.comini-search/weiMchlves7p_aalonadocap_docl...ernarnendklesq&s.accouneldnAC01110406202210122618Lupgradeablenno Page 2 of 2 EFTA00191340 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 12 of 22 Patin leach Daily News Arclavas 417/11 I 32 Ilit eninietilop4OO! Er" search lel Peke Beach Day Neva JUST A CLICK AWAY! s irahweletzPV Follow 499hinySittel on Twilled palmBeadfiDclifyNevticom _ NEWS Reel Estate Religion I kr hives I Advertise —1E Automotive al Env, Rio pogo tea Print rob logo tf Most pogo* New Search Return to /actin> Pnroci Filen*/ About your archives purchase: Your punthase of 20 articles expire, on 04107/2011 4:22 PM. You hove viewed 2 ankles and have 16 *Metes remaining. Pain Desch Daily News (FL) LAWYER: EPSTEIN MADE ADMISSIONS ON TAPE MICHELE (MADAN, Daily News Staff Witter Published: Apdi 29. 2010 A tape recorded interview between a reporter and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epste'n contains 'damning admIeslone by Epstein,' which Includes rotten saying he had come "dose to crossing a one' concerning sex with underage girls. Those and other revelations about the 22-trinute Interview by New York Day News reporter RULi with Epstein are contained in a 24-page court Ping by **may* Brad Edwards and POW Cast* on hail of Jane Doe. Edwards represents Doe and Pave other Epstein victims. Edwards and Cassell are lIghting to obtain the tape to further the, cane of sexual abut* by Epstein when Dos was a minor Epstein, 57. was released from Jell in July alter *Wog 13 mono., of an Igrnonth slate sentence for soliciting • mho: for 020abiu••• and stliktting prostIttlon Nearly two dozen young women have Mod lewsults against Epstein — some already settled -• as alleging Epstein sexually abused them as mince, el his El Brill° Way home, where he b now serving house west The New York Daily News is seeking to keep the tope confidential, citing reporlans protected privilege. In response, Cassell says the newspaper waived Ks protected privilege when Rush played the recording for three people and daunted its contents to two others, Including Edward. In addition. Cattail writes that pnviege cant be app led In this situation because It doesn't Involve an Issue misled Ia e conildentai source The pent* on the tape is Epstein. Evan If there Is 'outlined privilege.' Cased maintains It Is outweighed by Doe's insblity lo obtain the information anywhere else and her 'compel:nu need loobten Jeffrey EpsteIn's own words about his sexual abuse end tack of remorse' When reached by phone Wednesday, Anne Cant seamy for the New York Dent News. said she will answer Cassait In a coon Ming. Both the New Your Daly News and Doe have asked a ladeni court lodge In Manhattan to listen to the tape In chambers to help determine whether *Niter applies Epstein and others who heeped him procure minor gins for massages end sex acts have taken the Fifth Amendment In the r deposition,. stymieing Doe and the other victim suing Epstein. the document, say. Michael Fitters. tut Investigator worlong for Doe, discovered the ultimo, of the tape in fall 2009. An author who had listened to the tape told Fisten that Rush had a tape retorting of Epstein 'discussing the sexual ribose of minor gins' According to a sworn affidavit by Ratan. he cared Rush. who confirmed he Interviewed Epsleen end made a tape. Actonling to Amen. Rush toad him that he compiled negative Information from Epstein about his exploits with underage ohs and how he eluded the justka system But Fitton said that Rush told him Mal his publisher, who knows Epstein. Used II after receiving a cal from Epstein FIslen sold Rush told rim. among other things. that the following Information was contained on the tape That Ewa n said he went to Jail in Florida for no reason end • the sexual abuse of minors had happened In New York, he would have oily received a 2200 Ara That L.M., one of Edwards' clients who sued Epstein for sexual abuse as e minor, crone to h.m es a prosUrate and a drug user (mean rig she cane to NM for sex, rather than him purstAng her) That all the g de suing Nm era only hying to get a meal ticket. That me only thing he mole have done wrong was to maybe cross the Ina a *tie too closely. In a sworn deposition. Edwards states that Rush **dosed much of the information contained on the tape to tdm In e conversation Edwards said in his statement that the Rush Interview Is 'on quo end not otherwise obtainable from other witnesses beaus* a can be used to Men Potion a Nen' atm& Edwards saki Epstein Intik* in o deposition that he did not recognize ins name Rush from the New York Deily News 'despite the fact that ha gave a personal Interview that we ag.now to have bean tape recorded.' mdarganapbdatlynews corn hug iintnewsbank.comfnl -searchfw*Atchlvesip_aCtIonudoceigclect ofname -clklescilis_accountld•SC0I1104062022101226144_upgradeableuno Page 1 of 2 EFTA00191341 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 13 of 22 Palm Beach Daly News Archives 4/ 7/11 1 32 PM Epstein Hee mme close to crossing e Copyright (c) 2010 Palm Beech Deity News ReffnenCeiletetatielle 1160.000 Mortgage for 6669/mo. No SSN rep cemGe.compeangeoe tlM Your Auto Insurer hate, We. neesnfreecnollinAam en2Cheett_CredItSCOce He Added 126 Points To His Credit Score www.CmIltRippoldromiloint tom SZWitlell_:_167,12P0M/SSI Make Myer Wareing From HOMO. As seen on yommonimmaemonnoe neVtaas C%B60 - htip://nInewsbank.comirti-semchfwerArchlres7p_actIonndooSp_docl...ernameedkleso&s_accountldeAC0111040620221012261&s..upgradeablenno Page 2 of EFTA00191342 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 14 of 22 Page I LexisNexis" 6 of II DOCUMENTS Copyright 2009 ProQuest Information and Learning All Rights Reserved ProQuest SuperText Copyright 2009 Palm Beach Post Palm Beach Daily News September 20, 2009 Sunday DnI Edition SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A.1 LENGTH: 1126 words HEADLINE: ATTORNEY FOR EPSTEIN VICTIMS: 'I HAVE NEVER SEEN A STRANGER CASE' BYLINE: MICHELE DARGAN, MICHELE DARGAN, Daily News Staff Writer BODY: Sex offender Jeffrey Epstein could have been charged with multiple counts of five federal offenses involving sex acts with minors and faced a life sentence, but, instead, the government agreed not to prosecute him or his procurers if he spent 18 months in the county jail on two state charges. Those were the details unsealed Friday in a nine-page federal non- prosecution agreement that lets Epstein and co-conspirators Sarah Kellen, Adrian& Ross, Lesley Groff and Nadia Marcinkova off the hook for any of those past crimes. "He could have gone to prison for life and somehow he's getting immunity in exchange for nothing? said Fon Lauderdale attorney Brad Edwards, who represents three Epstein victims. "I have never seen a stranger case. To me, it's more spectacular what's not in it. It's the U.S. Attorney's Office saying we'll do everything in our power to see he doesn't get punished." Edwards has been fighting for a year in federal and state court to unseal the agreement. "The non-prosecution agreement raises more questions than it answers," said Miami attorney Adam Horowitz, who represents seven victims. "Why did all the co-conspirators receive immunity? Why were the victims not consulted re- garding the sentence? Why did he receive such a minimal sentence? The federal deal has remained sealed in Epstein's state court file since he pleaded guilty in June 2008 to state charges of procuring a minor for prostitution and soliciting prostitution. U.S. Attorney's Office does not comment The federal charges he could have faced were: conspiracy to persuade minor females to engage in prostitution, conspiracy to travel to engage in illicit sexual conduct with minor females, persuading minor females to engage in pros- titution, traveling to engage in illicit sexual conduct with minor females and causing a person under 18 years to engage in sex for money while knowing they are underage. The charges carry various statutory penalities ranging from 10 years to life, with a minimum mandatory of at least 10 years. Alicia Valle, spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami, declined comment. Expert: Feds take few sex-assault cases EFTA00191343 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 15 of 22 Page 2 ATTORNEY FOR EPSTEIN VICTIMS: 'I HAVE NEVER SEEN A STRANGER CASE' Palm Beach Daily News September 20, 2009 Sunday North Palm Beach criminal defense attorney Barry Maxwell said he is not surprised that federal charges weren't filed. "My experience has been that the federal government does not intervene in sex-assault cases, except if we're deal- ing with a serial rapist or it crosses jurisdictional lines," Maxwell said. "It's either not a big enough case or not atrocious enough for them." Epstein, 56, served 13 months of his 18-month sentence at the Palm Beach County Stockade and received liberal work-release privileges while in jail. He was able to go to his West Palm Beach office six days a week for up to 16 hours a day. He is now serving one year of probation at his Palm Beach mansion and is registered as a lifelong sex offender. Epstein 'flatly abided' by deal, says defense Epstein's attorney Jack Goldberger released the following statement: "This document relates to allegations that were made many years ago. It was by its provisions and agreement of the parties to remain confidential in part to protect the identities of collateral third parties. "Mr. Epstein has fully abided by all of its terms and conditions. He is looking forward to putting this difficult peri- od of his life behind him. He is continuing his longstanding history of science philanthropy both here In South Florida and nationwide." Goldberger had blocked the unsealing by filing court papers asking that the documents stay scaled "to prevent a se- rious imminent threat to the fair, impartial and orderly administration of justice; to protect a compelling government interest; to avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties; and to avoid substantial injury to a party by disclosure of matters protected by a common law and privacy right, not generally inherent in these specific type of proceedings, sought to be closed." Circuit Judge Jeffrey Colbath ordered the agreement to be unsealed in June, but Epstein's attorneys appealed the ruling to the Fourth District Court of Appeals, which affirmed Colbath's ruling. Colbath had ruled that the federal agreement — sealed in state court — was improperly sealed. 'I felt it was my fault' More than a dozen lawsuits against the billionaire money manager have been filed in federal and state court, all with similar allegations: that a minor girl was taken to Epstein's mansion on El Brillo Way and led upstairs to a spa room by one of Epstein's assistants, where he would ask the girl to perform massages and/or various sex acts, for which he would pay her. One victim, who is known as Jane Doe #5 in a federal court lawsuit against Epstein, said she didn't find out about the deal until after it was finalized. She was IS at the time one of her schoolmates told her she could make $200 by giv- ing a massage to a man in Palm Beach. She says she was "nervous and scared and wanted to leave" once she got to Epstein's spa mom. "I thought, 'I can't call my dad or my mom because I'm stuck in this situation and didn't know what to do," she said. "I really didn't know what this man was capable of. For a long time, l felt like it was my fault and that's exactly what he wanted me to feel." Epstein has curfew While he is serving the 12 months of house arrest at his Palm Beach home, Epstein must observe a 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew, have no unsupervised contact with anyone younger than 18 and not view, own or possess pornographic or sexual materials. The indictment followed an ll-month investigation by Palm Beach police, who said Epstein paid five underage girls for massages and sometimes sex at his El Brillo Way home. Then-State Attorney Barry Krischer declined to pros- ecute Epstein on multiple charges involving unlawful sex acts with minors. Instead, he brought the case to a grand jury, which charged Epstein on the lesser charge of soliciting prostitution. Then-Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter wrote Krischer a letter asking him to remise himself from the case. When that didn't happen, Reiter requested an FBI investigation to determine if any federal laws were broken. EFTA00191344 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 16 of 22 Page 3 ATTORNEY FOR EPSTEIN VICTIMS: 'I HAVE NEVER SEEN A STRANGER CASE' Palm Beach Daily News September 20, 2009 Sunday 'Out of the ordinary' West Palm Beach criminal defense attorney Gregg Lerman said several aspects of the Epstein case are unusual. "I don't understand why it would be a federal case in this circumstance, and why was there anything in writing at all and why did they seal the agreement? Lerman said. 'Why did it go to the grand jury instead of through the state filing lewd assault charges? That's unusual. And it's very unusual that they structure a plea to get county time rather than prison time. That's definitely out of the ordinary. Nobody goes to county jail as a state criminal punishment." — mdargan (i)pbdailynews.com GRAPHIC: Caption: Epstein Deal does not allow prosecution of co- conspirators. LOAD-DATE: September 1, 2010 EFTA00191345 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 17 of 22 Local News West Palm Beath. Palm Beach County, Martin at SI. Ludt Counties I The Palm Beach Post S/6/11 1 38 PM I rim .INDUillONFLTRELOIL• CLEANS OUT UP TO 40% OF SLUDGEIN THE WE OIL CHANGE? MI NEWS Oita ell, hot' s Source I l l 1 tit, • Gov.Scott 0 L ocal News Li, Creak, Palm Beaches and Trrasure Coen 0 ht. 0 WaS Welt Search by YAHOO. Palm Beach sex offender's secret plea deal: Obama Launches Mortgage Relief Plan Possible co-conspirators not charged, presses II you owe less Moo ST20 000 on our victims to settle civil suits rnongage_apkprobobly gaahly for the PresIdenl'S Making Nome Affordable BY SUSAN SPENCER.WENDEL Program WM roles lower Than they've ever been there has never been o better lime to Pam 80•01 Post Shoff Meer refinance It you woo homeowner and you Friday. Seplamber 10.2009 haven looked 'Me refinancing recently you WEST PALM BEACH — fiflonaire Mender sex offender Jeffrey Epstaln's secret non-proseaNch weaned ha may be surwffied at how much you can save 'Ouch with Wein prosecutor, was Waxed Friday. Offering the not pubic look et the deal Epstein's high-powered legal canal brokered on hie behalf Select Your Agee HT "I Soo:ding the agreement, ha Federal GUMMI of Investigation and the U S Altoinefs Ottica invehlgaled Epstein oalcutelellegthouseitymmu IOr verhus Went afros India/00 PrOsalutton some pun shed. by • Wilma" 01 10 yen uP to la In Olen COLUMNISTS AND SLOGGERS But redenil prosaanon backed down and *greed lc mad goy fry subpoenas. II Epstein ganged guilty to pnatlagarnrshend felonies h mate court which heutUrnately de Ile reashed an 154nanth Oa sentence of which FRANK CERABINO he served 13 Read Frank's blest catarrhs end fedora him on Teller A lama tenni prosecutor of 15 yeert Mad Johnson al Stuart said the depanty In the odorant sentences was Read mere arse/ The USW Saws Moneys Oda dee *dyed not lo charge any ol Eolith's possible co-compmica • Sarah NOT CELEBRITY NEWS Kellen, Actlans Rom Lesley Groff end Nada Misrartove Got the West on South Flags eeretnerw. balchelree. The agreement was negotiated In pert by New York howywegm ezignInal deem. Quemoy Geoid Larogn Willem. more Pagelilve on Its Aril draft h SePtentRar 21301.ilIerfulmd wt Epstein Par en &TOSS • LOOPS by the U.S AranYri• OfAce 7n and approved by Epheln -to represent some of the slams In civil wits they had reed newt Spank, Thal BEN NEli attorney le promised Miami Weyer Doti Josafsbeg off works corms., Bennetts latest Former prom:dor Johnson sag ho has nrner nen a provision Ma that belay i Read mew But en edclondon to the adeentent signed the b owing month stud EISetataYs dry te pay SaatabaTilaS and Me victims WS not scup( a soltament end head Wwed litigator MOST POPULAR nolo istr, c_caaato The agreement. alined by Aselstent U S Stoney Mena Vlits'ens. don not washy sale whether any Nano Fatal shooting In Delray Beech draws crowd of 100 were contained or consulted beton. he del was made. onfooluwe - • Attorney Brad Edwards of Fort Logordale. who repined. Inge of he young women. believes eel none of pa Lake Worts Worth mayor lays The Canso complohla use between 30 end 40 woman klionthed Cs vxtrns In the federal hveetggon were laid of the del Ed ride said No 'gay Care SWIM day manager clients were nil fepeiving Wen a the mall months aletwerds saying Me U.9 Attorneys Office enuring thorn Weil Pim Deed, Mho': Finfighen listaffs MKT Epstein would be prosecuted Nifty Nevedi dimmed In 2009 Fan Lauderdale Meng 'Never Ontiulting he victims a probably the most milogrous aspect of • • E delude SWIM *am SI other noishentwlew inane *Oh money on buy Ms way out of anydikg Ira outrageous end embarrneing Ce United State* . _ Morays Othrte and the State Attorneys Onto' Nyman Poemwlmal new talst at ATM Meaty muff Epstein now feces many chllevamits fled by Me *Omen. who ere rePrellenial by • vs/101Y Altorrera In "SS. the fads sailed are the @erne that famish had a pied ecuon for teenage gale. dahlia? poor. 'anorak, an., end FOLLOW THE POST ON TWITTER lung them to Ns hone via other young women The teens descnbs esteno.ne a atalrcasa fried with nude Phologradis of young don end to the spa roan where Epstein woud appear in a sawn laWal ,,, SION UP FOR MOBILE TEXT ALERTS Fame. Chat Judge 811 WOW. wed manedu one of Me victima. end The Pain Bead) Poet sagN the ' :tn. unsealing of the evened Berger refers ail as a 'swell/wan 0aai • G. The Palm Beach Post ..n I my* - 'Why wee li so Imported 'or he godmmont to make ads deal?' Berger asked ttelalcaay 'We have not yet had honest explanalfon by any public panda/ as to why II was made and wily On VICIWY9 were IOW dews/ to river • tar fanner leder* prosecutor Ryon McCabe described the agreement in 'very uncirlhodoe Such agreements. he said. are Overly reserved for corpof•tions. not Incettcluals 16.95% prop r like The Palen Beach Post blip //weempalmbeachpostom/pbtwest/contentilocalnews/eparael/200 9/09/18/0918epstelnevml Page I of 3 EFTA00191346 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 18 of 22 Local Newt West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Marlin di Si. Lucie Counties I The Palm Beach Post 416/t3 138 PM I Ma vary, nry ram Ih novae men or Mead of the prtiardOre that wet let up hero' uld McCabe who ha. no invetvemoM in my Epstein Illlsollon and is now o securities itgaton Niamey 'He's ersenkay molded leden) mmemlices because he can etlord lo pay Ina rimy lawyers to help them Van, roPenv their cent pro"emotion.' If. paw has no money he couldn't be *No to WM• dui Ilko Otis and avoid ledoral I P! NIS* The beck-teem del WM !adore prosecutors d pus more Interning Milan 01 the HMI hturiyinighte win have worked tor Epstein Including Henri Fenno' Nun Danneertz end Kenneth Sim of anion Impeadenont lefts »rimy emir »die . Lelcove le • pest penident c4 the Nebel& AseedatIon of Criminal Dolton Lawyers Egitesys local deems exemity. Jack GeldbergOI. Issued a «element Friday saying he had fought tie rebase or ion Misled agreement to protect the third men homed Ouse NM Epstein Noe MN ebbed byd of Its Wins and Recent Activity condemn Hen looting Inward to goats MIa øi'llovit ported in hO Ide beNnd low He Is caidnueg Na long etendvo history of edema philesitvo9T • I• e You mod to be lugged mu t ic.b,..nJ, 1$ Epstein *edged up melding Metal chimes. end pleaded puny b sten Ø lo felony eolkitanon of poseolen and $ yt I di' altMly procuring a pence Letter the WI 01 18 for prestihtIon In My 2006. he was sentenced to Ill months In ialf and Isler Mowed °duple aka dam • melt en wee «Mose Cerablite: Fonda House Con 'wine.' Bain A free-speech battle Is 'nu. Fetish Nil the jell In tale nay 2009 Ow earring not cieN 13 months of the (enema, Paying carom min tine for good behavior 1,111 peeps shared du,. Palm Bach Palm began Inveetlgaang the lelemaMriel swarm el nary.' as tie New York megohm dubbed NM. artor they retained a carplakil ken a relative 01 a 14.yeareed girt etc hed Slyer* Epstein a naked massage øl Ne hone on the Inamoastal Wilton/ay in Foreclosure OM. fed -up fide/gel end( dorm disorder In the courts 207 Nook shared fib,. Polka nought and found h poor neighboMoode • Helen or lak ht. model-Ike young woman. no told 'brim of begin reaviord. Mon going b Epasawa humus and messepig and etle lattng him They walked sway win between $200 tvid SIDI» finbeo, ~Janes The investig•ticn triggered tenslon, between poke end profecuton. wet thenthief Michael Railer saying In POSTPIX a tmoo ravros emus May 2006 Utter to Pion-Stale Attorney Beery Knoche/ ml Bus NW prosecutor MØ Powell" himself •1 continue le And you onkes treatment of theta cases NoNy unusual' Railer wrote He Man stied for and got Mt MØ investigsben mat ended in the mend dos rr' 'The Milroy Ewen manor was en e valence ol nal a manenttion-cloaat dew,e can ariccaplah iold the Pahi Beach Daily News upon Ns retirement WAGES OF WAR In tree Massive ear quake and and Alghanistain isunairl Climatal* Japan ISPE. Jed MØ Sworn o es Severe nether in Central Mara Scuds Florida po Your Feel nun? SEU3Y SHOES $81.969.9369 3YelIPui Wen" Mø Vega iendern IN THE SHADE INC 772.223.1212 free Marino Test, BELTONE S01.948-3040 (Surmol Moroi In Dalrat MARIOS MEATS 581.499.7019 QIS Yell( Feel nemt WWI SHOES 561.969.9169 Historic Archive (1897 - *988) Sewell historic 06UOM of The PPS Boedl Post. Pohl Booty Doily Nows Afyon, Nows and more as keel blip ilwiT'T•PalmbliwilPosiicomflibenef1/03nlinlileal_nevidiePaper 2009/09/18/09 I tie p s two ?Imo Page 2 of 3 EFTA00191347 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 19 of 22 Page I LexisNexis 7 of II DOCUMENTS Copyright 2009 ProQuest Information and Learning All Rights Reserved ProQuest SupaText Copyright 2009 Palm Beach Post Palm Beach Daily News June 25, 2009 Thursday Final Edition SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A.I LENGTH: 557 words HEADLINE: JUDGE TO RULE ON SEALED PLEA-DEAL PAPERS TODAY BYLINE: MICHELE DARGAN, MICHELE DARGAN, Daily News Staff Writer BODY: A circuit judge will decide today whether the public will be privy to the federal government's non-prosecution deal with Jeffrey Epstein, which was sealed when the convicted sex offender pleaded guilty in June 2008 to two felony counts. Epstein, of Palm Beach, will be released from the Palm Beach County Stockade July 22, after serving less than 13 months of his 18- month sentence for procuring a minor for prostitution and solicitation of prostitution. Teri Barbera, spokeswoman for the Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office, confirmed his release date Tuesday. Epstein's projected release date had been Sept. 24, but gain lime — which includes his participation in a work-release program — moves the date up to July 22, Barbera said. Epstein, 56, has been in the work-release program since Oct. 10, in which he is allowed out of the stockade six days a week, from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m., to go to his West Palm Beach office, the Florida Science Foundation, monitored by an ankle bracelet and accompanied by a deputy. As part of Epstein's state plea agreement, the U.S. Attorney's Office agreed not to prosecute Epstein on federal charges as long as he fulfills all requirements of his sentence and probation. The federal non-prosecution agreement has been under seal in state court. Epstein's attorney Jack Goldberger filed court papers asking that the documents stay sealed for the following rea- sons: "to prevent a serious imminent threat to the fair, impartial and orderly administration of justice; to protect a com- pelling government interest; to avoid substantial injury to innocent third parties and to avoid substantial injury to a party by disclosure of matters protected by a common law and privacy right, not generally inherent in these specific type of proceedings, sought to be closed." Fort Lauderdale-based attorney Brad Edwards represents three Epstein victims and has asked Circuit Judge Jeffrey Colbath to unseal the federal agreement to the public. An attorney for The Palm Beach Post also has asked that the rec- ords be unsealed. Edwards and his clients have seen the agreement after a federal judge ruled that they are allowed to see it. But that ruling bars Edwards and anyone else who sees the document from disclosing the terms to anyone else. Edwards said he wants to use that document "in the deposition of various material witnesses" relative to his cases. EFTA00191348 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 20 of ( 22 Page 2 JUDGE TO RULE ON SEALED PLEA•DEAL PAPERS TODAY Palm Beach Daily News June 25, 2009 Thursday Radaronline.com has reported that Epstein has "secretly been helping the reds unravel a Ponzi scheme" related to the June 2008 indictment of two former managers of Bear Stearns Mortgage Investment Fund. Epstein's rep, Howard Rubenstein, confirmed last year that Epstein is "Major Investor No. 1" in the indictment, which says he lost about 557 million. Goldberger could not be reached for comment. The Manhattan money manager has been incarcerated since June 30, when he pleaded guilty to the two felony counts. As part of the plea agreement, Epstein must serve one year of house arrest after his release and register as a life- long sex offender. In addition to the criminal case, there are more than a dozen civil lawsuits — both state and federal — pending against Epstein. All contain similar allegations: Epstein, through his employees and assistants, brought minor girls to his Palm Beach home on El Brill° Way for erotic massages and sometimes sex. — mdargan®pbdailynews.com GRAPHIC: Caption: Epstein To be released from jail July 22. LOAD-DATE: September I, 2010 EFTA00191349 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 21 of 22 Page I LexisNexis" 9 of 13 DOCUMENTS Copyright 2009 Sun-Sentinel Company All Rights Reserved Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, Florida) June IS, 2009 Monday Palm Beach Edition SECTION: LOCAL; Pg. 3B LENGTH: 348 words HEADLINE: HEARING SET TO CONSIDER SECRECY OF PLEA BARGAIN BYLINE: Susan Spencer-Wendell The Palm Beach Post BODY: A Palm Beach Circuit Court judge will not immediately unseal a deal that wealthy Palm Beach money manager Jeffrey Epstein made with federal prosecutors to avoid charges. Circuit Judge Jeff Colbath acknowledged, though, at a hearing last week that Epstein's deal was not sealed in ac- cordance with state and local court rules. "I don't see where any of the procedures were ever followed to begin with," Colbath said. Colbath also set a full hearing on the matter for lune 25. Attorneys for young women now suing Epstein, together with The Palm Beach Post, are asking Colbath to unseal the deal that Epstein made with federal prosecutors. "It's a secret agreement, a secret sweetheart agreement," said former Circuit Judge Bill Berger, who represents some of the women. "Everybody was in on this deal except the victims and the public. The public should be outraged it has gone as far as it has." Brad Edwards, a second attorney representing the women, has seen the sealed deal after a federal judge allowed him and his clients to view it, but would not discuss its contents. Edwards would say only that the women were "outraged' that it had been negotiated behind their backs. A reporter asked Edwards whether he thought Epstein received special treatment by federal prosecutors. "Are you kidding? It's transparent. Certainly, no one else gets treated like that," Edwards said. Epstein, 56, a reported money manager of billionaires, is serving an I8-month sentence in the Palm Beach County Stockade after pleading guilty almost a year ago in state court to felony solicitation of prostitution and procuring teen- agers for prostitution. Epstein is allowed out, though, each day horn 7 a.m. to I I p.m., a Sheriffs Office spokesman said. Displeased with the way the State Attorney's Office handled the case, Palm Beach police forwarded information to the FBI. INFORMATIONAL BOX: Young women have sued EFTA00191350 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 247-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 22 of 22 Page 2 HEARING SET TO CONSIDER SECRECY OF PLEA BARGAIN Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, Florida) June 15, 2009 Monday Money manager Jeffrey Epstein made a deal and is serving an 18-month sentence in jail. Attorneys for young women suing Epstein are asking a judge to unseal the deal that Epstein made with federal prosecutors. NOTES: < Informational box at end of text. (TOPIC) Prostitution solicitation case LOAD-DATE: June I5, 2009 EFTA00191351 Case 9:08-cv-B0736-KAM Document 247-3 Entered on FISD Docket 05/02/2014 Page 1 of 13 COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 3 EFTA00191352 caVelikarlergticRAM dirt:WM/61'1-491 feLgtWfbtficiffrqiaVed6€001$6gibt#014••• pkie of 43 tbe Ottobingtost Eleventh Circuit rules that discovery can move forward on my Crime Victims' Rights Act case By Paul Cassell Updated: April 21 at 9:41 am On Friday the llth Circuit ruled that discovery can move forward in an important Crime Victims' Rights Act case that my co-counsel, Brad Edwards, and I are pursuing. The narrow issue before the court was whether prosecutors and defense attorneys could assert some sort of "privilege" to prevent crime victims from reviewing the correspondence that lead to a plea bargain. More broadly, the ruling means that the victims will have a chance to return to the district court and seek to invalidate a plea agreement that (we alleged) was consummated in violation of their rights. I hope that the case will ultimately set an important precedent that federal prosecutors can't keep victims in the dark about the plea deals that they reach. Here are the important facts, taken from the Ilth Circuit's opinion: The case arose in 2006, the FBI began investigating allegations that wealthy investor Jeffrey Epstein had sexually abused dozens and dozens of minor girls. The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida accepted Epstein's case for prosecution, and the FBI issued victim notification letters to my two clients, minors Jane Doe No. I and Jane Doe No. 2, in June and August 2007. Extensive plea negotiations ensued between the prosecutors and Epstein. On Sept. 24, 2007, the prosecutors entered into a non- prosecution agreement with Epstein in which they agreed not to file any federal charges against Epstein in exchange for his guilty plea to minor Florida offenses (e.g., solicitation of prostitution). Not only did the prosecutors neglect to confer with the victims before they entered into the agreement with Epstein, they also concealed its existence for at least nine months. For example, the prosecutors sent post-agreement letters to the victims reporting that the "case is currently under investigation" and explaining that "[t]his can be a lengthy process and we request your continued patience while we conduct a thorough investigation." On June 27, 2008, the prosecutors informed my co-counsel Brad Edwards, that Epstein planned to plead guilty to the Florida charges three days later. But the prosecutors failed to disclose that Epstein's pleas to those state charges arose from his federal non-prosecution agreement and that the pleas would bar a federal prosecution. As a result, the victims did not attend the state court proceedings. On July 7, 2008, Edwards and 1 filed a petition alleging that Jane Doe No. I was a victim of federal sex crimes committed by Epstein and that the United States had wrongfully excluded her from plea negotiations. We also alleged that the federal prosecutors had violated her rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) http://www.washingtonpost.cominewsholokh-conspiracy!wp/2014/04/2 Veleventh-circuit-r... 5/2/2014 EFTA00191353 caWvot-Prsttodco,thet dbtatiyecinums kretvbanompc§egitiokiettgaivokc4..- plkits2 of /3 specifically her rights to confer with the government, to be treated with fairness, to receive timely notice of relevant court proceedings, and to receive information about restitution. The United States responded by claiming that it used its "best efforts" to comply with the rights afforded to victims under the CVRA, but that the act did not apply to pre-indictment negotiations with potential federal defendants. After Jane Doe No. 2 joined the initial petition, the district court (Marra, J.) found that both women qualified as "crime victims" under the CVRA. The district court later rejected the government's argument that the act only applies after the filing of a federal criminal indictment. (I've written a law review article about the issue of how early crime victims' rights attach in the criminal process, which can be downloaded here.) Among other relief, we sought rescission of the non-prosecution agreement as a remedy for the violation of the victims' rights. To make the case for such a remedy, we moved for discovery of the correspondence between the U.S. and Epstein's attorneys during the plea negotiations. Epstein's attorneys intervened, arguing that Federal Rule of Evidence 410 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 create a privilege for plea negotiations, barring release of the correspondence. They also argued that the court should find that the materials were protected under the work product doctrine or, alternatively, should be protected under a new "common-law privilege for plea negotiations." The district court first ruled that rescission of the plea agreement was a possible remedy under the act. The court then ruled that we were entitled to review the correspondence, rejecting all of Epstein's arguments. On Friday, the 11th Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling that we could review the plea correspondence. At pp. 18-22 of its published opinion, the court concluded that there was no basis for restricting access to such correspondence when crime victims have a legitimate need to review it. The court rejected, for example, the work product argument because plea discussions are not confidential: Disclosure of work-product materials to an adversary waives the work-product privilege. See, e.g., In re Chrysler Motors Corp. Overnight Evaluation Program Ling., 860 F.2d 844, 846 (8th Cir. 1988); In re Doe, 662 F.2d 1073, 1081-82 (4th Cir. 1981). Even if it shared the common goal of reaching a quick settlement, the United States was undoubtedly adverse to Epstein during its investigation of him for federal offenses, and the intervenors' disclosure of their work product waived any claim of privilege. . . . The court also declined to recognize a new privilege for plea bargaining, finding the relationship between prosecutors and defense attorneys did not need special protection: As a last-ditch effort, the intervenors contend that "lijf more is needed in addition to the plain language of Rule 410 to preclude disclosure of the correspondence to plaintiffs, it can be found in the conjunction of Rule 410, the work-product privilege, and the Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel in the plea bargaining process," but this novel argument fails too. As explained above, Rule 410 http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/04/21/eleventh-circuit-r... 5/2/2014 EFTA00191354 caRcniglarSektitisikAt dbEefrFibfrinAtil fietarkobwr€§evoNSicOotAtasolci...pg§siq efh does not create a privilege and the intervenors waived any work-product privilege. The intervenors concede too that the right to counsel under the SiVI Amendment had not yet attached when the correspondence was exchanged. Lumlek. City ofDade City, Fla., 327 F.3d 1186,1195 (11th Cir. 2003) ("[T]he Sixth Amendment right to counsel ordinarily does not arise until there is a formal commitment by the government to prosecute," such as a "formal charge, preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or arraignment."). The "conjunctive" power of three false claims of privilege does not rescue the correspondence from disclosure. . .. The Supreme Court has identified several considerations relevant to whether a court should recognize an evidentiary privilege—the needs of the public, whether the privilege is rooted in the imperative for confidence and trust, the evident' ry benefit of the denial of the privilege, and any consensus among the states, Jaffee' Redmond, 518 U.S. I, 10-15 (1996)—but none of these considerations weighs in favor of recognizing a new privilege to prevent discovery of the plea negotiations. Although plea negotiations are vital to the functioning of the criminal justice system, a prosecutor and target of a criminal investigation do not enjoy a relationship of confidence and trust when they negotiate. Their adversarial relationship, unlike the confidential relationship of a doctor and patient or attorney and client, warrants no privilege beyond the terms of Rule 410. See Jaffee, 518 U.S. at 10. But the victims would enjoy an evidential)/ benefit from the disclosure of plea negotiations to prove whether the United States violated their rights under the Act. Moving forward, this case raises the important issue of what kinds of remedies are available for violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act. Our complaint alleges that, prodded by Epstein, the federal prosecutors deliberately concealed the sweetheart plea deal they had reached with him to avoid public criticism of the deal. I am hopeful that in future district court proceedings, we will be able to prove that clear violation of the CVRA and then obtain the remedy of invalidating the illegally- negotiated plea deal. The Washington Post Company hnp://vAvw.washingtonpost.com/newsivolokh-conspiracyiwpf2014/04/21/eleventh-circuit-r... 5/2/2014 EFTA00191355 catinc6W-WIStsaiff I51561.40fir2trYStrEleet914110 31 15s1Mtrket 05/02/2014 Pad 8113 Follow us on Friday. May 2. 2014 l 3'56 p m Subscribe i Today's paper I Customer care Sign In I Register r),c-rafj i/ /v9 the shiny sheet Search Posted: 12 00 a.m. Monday. April 21. 2014 Appeals court rules against sex offender Attorneys for underage victims seek to overturn 'sweetheart plea.' Related By Michele Dargan Daily News Staff Writer Underage victims of billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein are entitled to correspondence between federal prosecutors and Epstein's attorneys related to his sweetheart plea deal, a federal appeals court ruled Friday. This is one more step in the fight by victims' attorneys Brad Edwards and Paul Cassel110 overturn the secret deal. which saved Epstein from facing serious federal charges and serving significant prison lime. If Epstein had been found guilty on federal charges, statutory penalties ranged from 10 years to life in prison. Instead, the sealed pact was pail and parcel of Epstein's acceptance of a slate plea deal Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting a minor for prostitution and soliciting prostitution. He received an 18-month sentence in a vacant wing of the Palm Beach County Stockade, and was let out on work release six days a week for up to 16 hours a day. Edwards and Cassell represent Jane Doe No. 1 and Jane Doe No. 2, who say the U.S. Attorneys Office violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act by signing the federal non-prosecution agreement In 2007 without notifying the victims. Their case is pending in U.S. District Court in West Palm Beach. The 24-page published opinion says U S. District Judge Kenneth Marra did not err in his June 2013 ruling, when he ordered the correspondence turned over to the victims. "Sweetheart plea' 'We're now going to get a complete picture of the negotiations that led to this sweetheart plea arrangement,' said Cassell. a former federal judge 'We think It will show the part of the discussion to keep the victims in the dark about what was happening. If that's what the correspondence shows, we'll use that as part of our argument for throwing out the plea: Cassell said he anticipates that 500 pages of correspondence should be released early this week The opinion by the three-judge panel ruled against Epstein's arguments that the correspondence was protected by an attorney's work-product privilege. The court says privilege was waived when attorneys voluntarily sent the correspondence to federal prosecutors during negotiations. "Disclosure of work-product materials to an adversary waives the work-product privilege: the ruling says. hup://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/news/local/appeals-court-rules-against-sex-offe... 5/2/2014 EFTA00191356 CAPIVii8c61.41071361WASOft I91560/011r±47117.1Eiiltfrelt145104E51!)seblaket 05/02/2014 Pgrae€ 8113 The ruling also dismissed Epstein's claims that a federal rule of evidence protects his plea correspondence. That rule applies only to defendants who withdraw a guilty plea. Because he pleaded guilty. that doesn't apply, the ruling says. 'While respectful of the panel's decision, given issues of overriding importance to the criminal justice system regarding the need for continued confidentiality for communications between defense lawyers and prosecutors, we will be petitioning the court of appeals for further review: said Boston based atlomey Martin Weinberg, who represents Epstein. The U.S. Attorney's Office failed to notify victims prior to striking a non-prosecution agreement with Epstein on Sept. 24. 2007. and didn't tell them of the agreement's existence for al least nine months, the ruling says. On June 27, 2008, the U.S. Attorney's Office told the victims that Epstein planned to plead guilty to stale charges three days later. But federal prosecutors failed to disclose that his pleas to the stale charges arose from his federal non- prosecution agreement and would bar federal charges. Jane Does No. 1 and No. 2. who were, respectively. 12 and 13 at the time they were victimized,received confidential monetary settlements in civil cases. They are among more than two dozen underage girls who filed lawsuits or settled claims against Epstein. All alleged they were lured to his Palm Beach mansion to give him sexually charged massages andlor sex In exchange for money. 'A well-connected billionaire got away with molesting many girls,' Edwards said. "These girls should al least know how and why he was able to get away with these crimes. This ruling will allow us access to the documents that will provide insight into how that happened. I suspect that the answers revealed by these documents will ultimately allow us to invalidate that agreement and permit prosecution of Mr. Epstein." More News We Recommend From Around the Web • Appeals-court decision in Epstein case rights a Bad Neighborhoods: How to Read the Warning terrible wrong (Palm Beach Daily News) Signs Before You Move in (realtor.com) • Memorial service set for former 'Daily News' The 5 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. (AARP) reporter (Palm Beach Daily News) Stunning Photos Of Leonardo DiCaprio's For • Ernest S. Johnston Jr. (Palm Beach Daily News) Sale Home (Lonny Magazine) • Choosing plants? There's always something new Rosie O'Donnell Is Buying Olivia Newton-John's (Palm Beach Daily News) Florida Estate For $5.6 Million... See The • Slate restripes Royal Palm intersections (Palm Pictures (Lonny) Beach Daily News) • Andy Griffith's Widow to Raze His Home (AARP) • Eunice "Penny Jacobs (Palm Beach Daily • Supermodel Heidi Klum's Kid Is Growing Up News) Gorgeous (StyleBistro) Comments II you would like to post a comment please Sign in or Register Cancel I Edit comment 2 Comment(s) Comment(s) 1.2 of 2 • Posted by THEPALMBEACHER1 at 3:02 pm Apr 21. 2014 • Report Abuse Its inconceivable to see articles like this!' USUALLY, one gels charged with statutory rape, child molestation, etc.. and its Guaranteed that they will do prison lime. Now, If your a "BILLIONAIRE". you can BUY yourself freedom, and throw money to the victims and say adiostlft Its OBVIOUS, payments. kickbacks. DONATIONS, financial promises are all part of this deal. Where is the JUSTICE SYSTEM? Where is the Stale Attorney. The JUDGES? People go to jail for petty thefts, illegal drugs, assault. battery, domestic violence, but this case is PROOF that the LEGAL system can be BOUGHT for the right price!!' Its OBVIOUS this individual has a severe mental problem, a sexual predator, who would ship young girls like human trafficking back and forth via his private jets . Its no different than "THE BACKPAGE" girls being exploited by their pimps http://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/news/locallappeals-court-rules-against-sex-offe... 5/2/2014 EFTA00191357 ca4elna-WISi-Wicift tgogiSOfiri474746iitliee1811510:eatisOlieket 05/02/2014 PglYte73 efi3 being housed in cheap motels along federal hwy for GUY LIKE THIS to get their sexual perversions satisfied!! Read tho entire case and see That young gills flowed thru Palm Beach South Ocean Blvd and South County Rd to his El Brillo "MANSION OF PERVERSION' with this guy as its Master!! For people to think "Palm Beach" has the "Elite", the "Upper Crust" of society, it also is home to some of the worst thieves, sexual predators, financial criminals the world has ever known!! Mr Epstein has Billions of Dollars, and can afford the Best Criminal Attorneys, yet Can't or WON'T get Professional Mental Help with hi9 sexual desires and fascination with young girls And the Court systems goes along with him!!! Unbelievable.. • Posted by Adios al 3:12 pm. Apr 22, 2014 • Report Abuse I agree with the post by the palm bleacher. This guy is a pery and needs to sit out of society. Vvhen listening to his depositions. he pretended to be insulted by the questions being asked of him and his lawyer shut it down quickly VVhat remains to be seen is if the soon lo be released files will bear the fruit we all hope it does My worry is that the tracks will be covered and he will not get his due His opinion of himself allows hum to think he did nothing wrong and these BABIES he molested were not of his place in society and were simply objects to be thrown away. Mat would he think if someone did that to his BABIES if he has any? I can bet that the full force of his money would work against whomever played with his kids. ...bloody gross! 2 Comment(s) Comment(s) 1.2 of 2 . <ling height="1" widther srcehttpfisegments.adapividatan perecruemediallatypenitIsegment= El4gadd=true http://www.palmbeachdailynews.corn/news/news/local/appeals-court-rules-against-sex-offe... 5/2/2014 EFTA00191358 can3eS-80§19-kemegelikiiiimfitailFAS0 ltizArAtileiligistreharetridianyirmt••• Avga h sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-jeffrey-epstein-federal-court-of-appeals- 20140421,0,6594687.story Sun Sentinel Victims win right to see negotiations that led to 'lenient' plea agreement for billionaire sex offender Latest in legal saga involving Jeffrey Epstein, 61, financier convicted of procuring minor for prostitution By Brett Clarkson, Sun Sentinel 7:43 PM EDT, April 21, 2014 Did a Palm Beach billionaire being investigated for having sex with young girls use his ad vertiseinenl wealth to negotiate a lenient and secret agreement that saw him avoid federal prosecution? Attorneys for two victims, known only as Jane Doe I and 2, may soon get an answer thanks to an appeals court ruling against financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, 61. The ruling, issued Friday, orders federal authorities to disclose the correspondence that took place between Epstein's attorneys and federal prosecutors when they were negotiating a 2007 agreement, which allowed him to escape federal prosecution if he pleaded guilty to state charges that carried a lesser penalty. "We're trying to figure out if Epstein used his political connections and great wealth to secure this kind of arrangement, that was unheard of, frankly, if you look at these charges," said Paul Cassell, an attorney for the women. Epstein is a native New Yorker who according to media reports built a huge fortune as a money manager and owns several properties including a primary residence in Manhattan, a Palm Beach mansion and his own island in the Caribbean. At one point he counted among his friends former President Bill Clinton, Donald Trump and other high-powered figures. The appeal court decision described the background of Epstein's case, stating that in 2006, the Federal Bureau of Investigation "began investigating allegations that Jeffrey Epstein had sexually abused several minor girls." In September 2007, federal prosecutors struck the non-prosecution deal with Epstein, but didn't tell the victims, court filings say. "Not only did the United States neglect to confer with the victims before it entered into the agreement with Epstein, it also failed to notify them of its existence for at least nine months," Circuit Judge William H. Pryor wrote in the appeals court decision. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-jeffrey-epstein-federal-court-of-appeals-2... 5/2/2014 EFTA00191359 caAP093t1t4-640§t9-ReAritegPiiikiiiiThIllakiflq° ItMtillellISM:1,50tVitrel?itiii7Okkff4••• qtytt 4 of13 In June 2008, Epstein pleaded guilty to a state charge of procuring a person under the age of 18 for prostitution and was sentenced to 18 months in prison. He spent 13 months behind bars, and is registered as a sex offender in Florida. The situation also resulted in civil suits being filed against Epstein, who according to media reports settled claims from about two dozen young women who alleged he paid them for sexual massages at his Palm Beach mansion, some as young as 14, according to media reports. To the attorneys who represent the Jane Does 1 and 2, the sentence was much lighter than the years, or possibly decades, that Epstein could've spent behind bars had he been prosecuted in the federal system. They're hoping that the correspondence, ordered released by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, will shed light on what they say is an unusually lenient deal. "I can say that I've been teaching criminal law for more than two decades and I have never seen a plea agreement as lenient as this one, for hands-on sex offenders," said Cassell, who is based in Salt Lake City. But one of Epstein's attorney's, Martin Weinberg, based in Boston, disputed those characterizations. Weinberg said Monday that the plea agreement was "reached in good faith" and that "it's not a fair conclusion" to describe the agreement as either improper or tainted by Epstein's wealth. "It's Mr. Cassell's hope that this correspondence may support that theory, but the reality is that the U.S. Attorney's Office made a responsible judgment in how to implement the law," Weinberg said. Weinberg said he was concerned about the potential impact the ruling would have on the ability of criminal defense attorneys and prosecutors to communicate confidentially. He also said he and Epstein co-counsel, Miami criminal defense attorney Roy Black, will ask the Atlanta-based appeals court to review the decision. As for the Jane Does, who are now over 18, it's just the latest development in a long legal saga, another one of their attorneys said. "They're pretty numb at this point to favorable news because they've heard this before and nothing's happened," said Fort Lauderdale attorney Brad Edwards. Edwards and Cassel said their goal is to have Epstein's plea agreement deemed to be in violation of federal victims' rights legislation and invalidated. Edwards said Epstein should face a new prosecution. Edwards also said he was first told by the U.S. Attorney's Office that he would receive the correspondence documents on Monday, but was then told that they weren't ready yet. Cassell said the documents number 500 pages. In an email, Annette Castillo, spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of Florida, said the office couldn't comment. bsclarksonetribune.cont, 561-243-6609 or Twitter @BrettClarkson http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-jeffrey-epstein-federal-court-of-appeals-2... 5/2/2014 EFTA00191360 CNgt0t58YLVS31tA§R5\MgtjeariStMig F4P 31BroI f 13 Copyright O 2014 South Florida Sun-Sentinel http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beachal-jeffrey-epstein-federal-court-of-appeals-2... 5/2/2014 EFTA00191361 sarzoiCase 9:08-cv-80736-KAMiatiSittc2407:6reinsterskattoRLFaviliGnaketa0100/02014 Page 11 of 13 84° 11:8? L74* © Friday, May 2.2014 Th e Palm Beach Post REAL NEWS STARTS HERE Sign Out ISearch Site 14 .bton'a,firrorill Resize text A A A Appellate ruling could force feds to reconsider sex charges against Palm Beacher Epstein Posted. 9., • rn Monday. April 21, 2014 BY DAPHNE DURET - PALM BEACH POST STAFF WRITER A federal appellate court has moved two young victims of billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein a step closer to wiping out a plea deal that prosecutors made behind their backs. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that the underage victims were entitled to see all correspondence between federal prosecutors and Epstein's lawyers regarding a secret 2007 plea deal that kept Epstein from federal charges in exchange for an I8-month work-release sentence in state prison. The plea negotiations took place as Epstein litigated a series of now settled civil claims surrounding allegations that he had sex in his Palm Beach mansion with dozens of underage girls. The two victims who are seeking the documents are not identified in court documents. They were 12 and 13 at hflpfhwennwolrrbeachposl.confnevarnewVappellale-niing could-force lads-lareconsider-seJnIflArbod- pbp internallink nbpbpirmlabortoxieb2014 )9cda 15 EFTA00191362 swzoiCase 9:08-11-80736-KAithiatDoirocnerdraa refintereclotwoRLSeductikettfAM014 Page 12 of the time of their liaisons with Epstein, who pleaded guil to two prostitution solicitation charges. The girls reached an out-of-court settlement with him. In ruling that the correspondence should be public, the appellate court authorized the release of more than 500 pages of documents. The victims' lawyers would use the documents to prove that, by keeping the agreement secret, prosecutors violated a federal act aimed at protecting victims' rights. A win in that battle could invalidate Epstein's agreement with federal prosecutors, allowing them to reconsider criminal charges, but this time with input from the victims. Epstein's lawyers argued that the correspondence constituted confidential plea negotiations and therefore should not be shared with the victims' lawyers. "Although plea negotiations are vital to the functioning of the criminal justice system, a prosecutor and target of a criminal investigation do not enjoy a relationship of confidence and trust when they negotiate," the appellate justices wrote, calling the prosecutor-defense attorney relationship adversarial. They upheld a 2013 ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Kenneth Marra. He ordered the release of all the plea documents, but only federal prosecutors complied. The victims' attorneys, Brad Edwards and Paul Cassell, have called the ruling a victory for the rights of victims to be heard, even in cases like Epstein's, where federal prosecutors ultimately never filed charges. The victims were unaware of the plea agreement until three days before Epstein pleaded to the state charges in June 2008. A federal deal had been in place for nine months by then. Had prosecutors filed charges and negotiated a plea with Epstein in federal court, they would be barred from seeking any additional punishment against him. But because his plea agreement to a sex solicitation charge came in state court, federal prosecutors theoretically could charge him again. Still, Epstein's lawyers could argue that the only reason he agreed to the state sentence was because he believed it would free him of the federal charges for good. Edwards said Epstein's attorneys have made parts of those arguments in pre-trial hearings, and he expects them to appeal Friday's ruling. Epstein's Boston- based attorney, Martin Weinberg. told the Palm Beach Daily News he would appeal. "While respectful of the panel's decision, given issues of overriding importance to the criminal justice system regarding the need for continued confidentiality for communications between defense lawyers and prosecutors, we will be petitioning the court of appeals for further review," Weinberg told the paper. Invalidating Epstein's plea would force federal prosecutors to meet with the alleged victims to hear their comments on whether to pursue charges against Epstein. They still could decline. "You can't force the federal government to prosecute anyone," Edwards said. "But we're hoping that if maybe http:/Ntemimpalnteachpost conYnensineva/appellatruling-couldforce1eds-to-reconsIder-seinellvehdethpbp_internallink_nwbpimilaticnbat reb2014 99cda 2/6 EFTA00191363 vinovCase 9:08-cv-80736-Kfichillatiksunetltrc2445010enteteticOirefal_Sevemketa01300N2014 Page 13 of we get some new eyes on the case and the circumstance are different, things will change." In this Section Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office otters salute lo 16 fallen in the line of duly over the decades Free movie al Boynton's Dewey Park on Friday Boynton Beach officers stop to investigate Camaro. witness theft of BMW: pursuit ends In crash Greenacres single-family home development moving forward Our Economy. Gardens complex lands 3 sizeable businesses Morning commute on 195, turnpike clear of crashes from Boca to Vero Find out how to work on the Riviera Beach marina development Royal Palm Beach Publix sells Fantasy S ticket now worth more than 5111K Sun. rain today and mostly rain Saturday in Palm Beach County. TCoast 3 NYPD officers arrested in separate gun incidents PREVIOUS: NEXT: LOCAL OPINION Tetiuesta crash sends seven people to Commentary: !las GM pulled a Pinto? hospitals Popular on MyPalmBeachPost.com All Comments (o) Post a Comment COMMENTS Post comment hIlp/Ay.wornweln-beachposlorYnens/newstappellale•rullna-could-lore&lecIS1O-rfteRsHW-Seinfflimlicidspbp_internaltink mnpimilationbox feb2014 99cda 3/6 EFTA00191364 PRIVILEGE LOG Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #1 File folder entitled "CORR RE GJ 6(e) P-000001 SUBPOENAS" containing correspondence Work Product thru related to various grand jury subpoenas and P-000039 attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes Box #1 Operation Leap Year Grand Jury Log 6(e) P-000040 containing subpoenas OLY-01 through OLY-81, Work Product thru correspondence and research related to Contains documents subject P-000549 enforcement of same, documents produced in to investigative privilege response to some subpoenas; and attorney Also contains documents (Villafafia) handwritten notes subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "Ritz Compact Flash SW" 6(e) P-000550 containing copies of a sealed search warrant Contains information subject thru application, warrant, and supporting documents to investigative privilege P-000621 Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "PNY Technologies Compact 6(e) P-000622 Flash SW" containing copies of a sealed search Contains information subject thru warrant application, warrant, and supporting to investigative privilege P-000693 documents Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "JE Corporations" containing Work Product P-000694 attorney research on Epstein-owned corporations Contains information subject thru and prior litigation to investigative privilege P-000781 Box #1 File folder entitled "Capital One" 6(e) P-000782 containing subpoena and correspondence thru P-000803 Box #1 File folder entitled "DTG Operations/Dollar 6(e) P-000804 Rent-a-Car" containing subpoena and responsive Contains documents and thru documents information subject to P-000854 investigative privilege Also contains documents and information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Page 1 of 23 EFTA00191365 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #1 File folder entitled "JP Morgan Chase" 6(e) P-000855 containing subpoena, correspondence, and Contains documents and thru responsive documents information subject to P-000937 investigative privilege Box #1 File folder entitled "Washington Mutual" 6(e) P-000938 containing subpoena, correspondence, and Contains documents and thru responsive documents information subject to P-000947 investigative privilege Box #1 File folder entitled "Computer Search &" Work Product P-000948 containing legal research on computer search and Attorney-Client tiny handwritten notes on indictment preparation Contains information subject P-000982 to investigative privilege. Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "Attorney Notes from Work product P-000983 Document Review" containing typed and 6(e) thru handwritten attorney (Villafafia) notes, target Contains information subject P-001007 letters, correspondence re grand jury subpoena to investigative privilege. Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "Notes from Fed Ex Records" Work Product P-001008 containing handwritten and typed attorney 6(e) thru (Villafana) notes and screen shots ofFedEx Contains information subject P-001056 subpoena response electronic file to investigative privilege. Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "Colonial Bank Records" 6(e) P-001057 containing records received in response to grand Contains information subject thru jury subpoena to investigative privilege P-001959 Box #1 File folder entitled "OLY Grand Jury Log Vol 2: 6(e) P-001960 OLY-5I THROUGH" containing subpoenas Contains information subject Thru numbered OLY-51 through OLY-81 with related to investigative privilege. P-002089 correspondence Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Page 2 of 23 EFTA00191366 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #1 File folder entitled "Epstein Corporate Records: P-002090 6(e) OLY-51, OLY-52, OLY-53, OLY-54" containing Contains information and Thru subpoenas, records received in response to documents subject to P-002169 subpoenas, and related correspondence investigative privilege Box #1 File folder entitled "Colonial Bank" containing P-002170 6(e) subpoenas, correspondence related to subpoenas, Contains information and Thru records received in response to subpoenas documents subject to P-002246 investigative privilege Box #1 File folder entitled "JEGE & Hyperion from P-002247 6(e) Goldberger OLY-46 & OLY-47" containing Contains information and Thru documents received in response to subpoenas documents subject to P-002265 investigative privilege Box #1 Indictment preparation binder containing: P-002266 Work product Grand jury subpoena log, evidence/activity Thru 6(e) summary chart, wimess/victim names and contact Contains information and P-002386 list, attorney (Villafada) handwritten notes, 302s, documents subject to portions of state investigative file, attorney investigative privilege. Also (Villafada) typed notes, of individuals listed as contains information and "Additional victims" documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 Indictment preparation binder containing: P-002387 Work product Grand jury subpoena log, evidence/activity Thru 6(e) summary chart, witness/victim names and contact Contains information and P-002769 list, attorney (Villafaila) handwritten notes, 302s, documents subject to portions of state investigative file, attorney investigative privilege. Also (Villafaila) typed notes, relevant pieces of grand contains information and jury materials, telephone records/flight records documents subject to privacy analysis charts, victim/witness photographs, rights of victims who are not DAVID records, NCICs, and related materials for parties to this litigation persons identified as Jane Does #15, 16, 17, 18, 19, Past Employees, Misc. Witnesses Box #1 Indictment preparation binder containing: P-002770 Work product witness/victim list with identifying information, 6(e) Thru sexual activity summary, telephone call summary Contains information and P-003211 chart, attorney (Villafaila) handwritten notes, documents subject to 302s, portions of state investigative file, attorney investigative privilege. Also (Villafalia) typed notes, relevant pieces of grand contains information and jury materials, telephone records/flight records documents subject to privacy analysis charts, victim/witness photographs, rights of victims who are not DAVID records, NCICs, and related materials for parties to this litigation persons identified as Jane Does #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Page .3 of 2.3 EFTA00191367 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #1 Indictment preparation binder containing meta- Work product P-003212 analysis charts of telephone/flight/grand jury 6(e) Thru information for a number of victim/witnesses, Contains information and P-003545 Nadia Marcinkova, and Adriana Mucinska documents subject to investigative privilege. Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 FBI Reports of March 2008 interviews of Work product P-003546 additional witness/victim located in New York 6(e) Thru Contains information and P-003552 documents subject to investigative privilege. Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 Printout of filenames from Federal Express Work product P-003553 subpoena response with Attorney notations 6(e) Thm P-003555B Box #1 Document entitled "Identified Numbers" with Work product P-003556 accompanying handwritten attorney list compiled 6(e) Thru from grand jury materials and attorney analysis of Contains information subject P-003562 records to investigative privilege Box #1 Folder entitled "Flight Manifests" containing 6(e) P-003563 manifests received pursuant to grand jury Contains information and Thru subpoena documents subject to P-003629 investigative privilege Box #1 File folder entitled "Recent Attorney Notes" Work product P-003630 containing handwritten attorney (Villafafia) notes 6(e) Thru regarding document review and case strategy Investigative privilege P-003633 Deliberative process Box #1 File folder bearing victim name containing FBI Work product P-003634 interview report from May 2008, telephone Attorney-client privilege Thru activity report with attorney (Villafanafia) 6(e) P-003646 handwritten notes, related grand jury material Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Page 4 of 23 EFTA00191368 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #1 File folder entitled "Summary of Sexual Activity" Work product P-003647 containing chart bearing handwritten title "Sexual 6(e) Thru Activity — Summary" with meta-analysis of Investigative privilege P-003651 information, sorted by name of each Deliberative process victim/witness, including name and identifying Also contains information and information of each victim/witness documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "Victim Civil Suits" Not privileged. P-003652 Produced to counsel for Thru Petitioners P-003663 Box #1 File folder entitled "Research re JE Websites" Work product P-003664 containing attorney research Thru P-003678 Box #1 File folder entitled "Serene Cano (N.Y. AUSA)" Work product P-003679 containing attorney (Villafana) handwritten notes Thru P-003680 Box #1 File folder entitled "Dr. Anna Salter" containing Work product P-003681 attorney (Villafana) memo to expert witness and Investigative privilege Thru handwritten attorney notes P-003687 Box #1 File folder entitled "I[] G[] Interview" containing Work product P-003688 attorney handwritten notes of interview, and Investigative privilege Thru attorney handwritten notes regarding potential Also contains information P-003693 charges subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "Research re Travel for Work product P-003694 Prostitution" containing attorney (Villafana) 6(e) Thru handwritten notes regarding grand jury Investigative privilege P-0037 1 1 presentation, chart entitled "Brought to Epstein's Also contains information and House" with handwritten notes, Message Pad documents subject to privacy meta-analysis chart, summary of evidence related rights of victims who are not to one victim/witness, and relevant grand jury parties to this litigation information Box #1 Empty file folder bearing name of victim/witness Investigative privilege P-003712 Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victim who is not a party to this litigation Page 5 of 23 EFTA00191369 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #1 File folder entitled "T[j MO" containing grand 6(e) P-003713 jury subpoenas, motion and order to compel Documents under seal Thru testimony, and correspondence regarding same pursuant to court order P-003746 Box #1 File folder entitled "Adriana Ross" containing 6(e) P-003747 subpoena and correspondence regarding same Thru P-003751 Box #1 File folder entitled "PBPD Investigative File" 6(e) P-003752 obtained via subpoena Investigative privilege Thru Also contains information and P-004295 documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box NI File folder bearing name of victim/witness Work product P-004296 containing meta-analysis chart showing telephone 6(e) Thm calls, travel, and grand jury materials relevant to Investigative privilege P-004350 possible charges Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this liti ation Box #1 File folder entitled "Daniel Documents Work product P-004351 53909-004" containing attorney research related Thru to bias issue P-004381 Box #1 File Folder entitled "FEDEX" containing 6(e) P-004382 documents obtained via subpoena Investigative privilege Thru P-004478 Box #1 File Folder entitled "State ofDelaware Records" 6(e) P-004479 containing documents obtained in preparation for Investigative privilege Thru indictment Work product P-004551 Box #1 File folder entitled "Jet Blue Records" containing 6(e) P-004552 documents obtained via subpoena Work product Thru Investigative privilege P-004555 Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "FL EMPLOYMENT Investigative privilege P-004556 RECORDS" containing FDLE records on targets Work product Thru and witnesses obtained at attorney request P-004560 Page 6 of 23 EFTA00191370 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #1 Filed folder entitled "JANUSZ BANASIAK" Work product P-004561 containing attorney (Villafafta) handwritten notes Investigative privilege Thru of interview P-004565 Box #1 File folder entitled "JANUSZ BANASIAK 6(e) P-004566 RECORDS 23-0001 THROUGH 23-" containing Work product Thru documents obtained via subpoena Investigative privilege P-004716 Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "IGOR ZINOVIEV" Work product P-004717 containing attorney research regarding witness Investigative privilege Thru P-004722 Box #1 File folder entitled "BEAR STEARNS Work Product P-004723 RESEARCH" containing attorney research Investigative privilege Thru regarding potential witness and subpoena P-004725 recipient Box #1 File folder entitled "LAWSUITS INVOLVING Work Product P-004726 EPSTEIN CORP'S" containing attorney research Investigative privilege Thru regarding Epstein's past personal and business P-004819 litigative practices Box #1 Filed folder entitled "SEC RECORDS" Work Product P-004820 containing attorney research regarding Epstein Investigative privilege Thru financial relationships P-004959 Box #1 File folder entitled "Message Pads" containing Work Product P-004960 selected items from evidence obtained via 6(e) Thru subpoena Investigative privilege P-005059 Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder bearing name of victim/witness Work Product P-005060 containing correspondence with counsel for 6(e) Thru victim/witness, attorney witness outline with Investigative privilege P-005081 attorney handwritten notes, attorney handwritten Also contains information and notes regarding witness reports and case documents subject to privacy preparation rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "New York Trip" containing Work product P-005082 attorney notes re witness interview Investigative privilege Thru P-005083 Page 7 of 23 EFTA00191371 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted P-005084 thru P-005107 are non responsive documents and have been removed Box #1 File folder entitled "ANNA SALTER" containing Work product P-005108 attorney research on select expert, use of experts Investigative privilege Thru at trials in child exploitation cases, and additional P-005193 research materials on offenders and victims Box #1 File folder entitled "Extra Copies" containing Work product P-005194 meta-analysis chart and 302's of victim/witnesses 6(e) Thru used in preparing indictment package Investigative privilege P-005300 Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box NI File folder entitled "JUAN ALESSI 6(e) P-005301 STATEMENT" containing transcript obtained via Investigative privilege Thru subpoena P-005331 Box #1 File folder entitled "KEN LANNING" containing Work product P-005332 attorney research on select expert, including Investigative privilege Thru attorney handwritten notes P-005341 Box #1 File folder entitled "Info re Planes" containing 6(e) P-005342 correspondence regarding subpoenas and Investigative privilege Thar documents received in response to subpoenas P-005387 Box #1 File folder entitled "Police Reports & PC Work product P-005388 Affidavit" containing portions of police reports 6(e) Thru with attorney notes, related phone records, a list Investigative privilege P-005442 entitled "Victims" with identifying information Also contains information and and attorney handwritten notes, photographs and documents subject to privacy DAVID information, and additional attorney rights of victims who are not research regarding Epstein sexual activity parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "[Victim name] Transcript of 6(e) P-005443 Interview & GJ Transcript" Investigative privilege Thru Also contains information and P-005496 documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #1 File folder entitled "Bear Stearns Subpoena 6(e) P-005497 Resp." containing material received in response Investigative privilege Thru to subpoena P-005556 Page 8 of 23 EFTA00191372 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #1 U.S. Attorney's Office Criminal Case File Jacket Work product P-005557 containing file opening documents, expert Deliberative process Thru witness payment documents P-005576 Box #1 U.S. Attorney's Office Asset Forfeiture Case File Work product P-005578 Jacket containing file opening and file closing Deliberative process Thru documents P-005583 Box #1 File folder entitled "6001 Immunity Request" 6(e) P-005584 containing internal memoranda seeking witness Work product and Thru immunity and correspondence with counsel for deliberative process (as to P-005606 witness regarding same internal memoranda) Investigative privilege Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder entitled "MASTER PHONE Work product P-005607 RECORDS" containing meta-analysis of all 6(e) Thru phone, travel, and grand jury data for all Investigative privilege P-005914 victim/witnesses for indictment preparation Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder bearing name of victim/witness Work product P-0059 I5 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that victim/witness for Investigative privilege P-005977 indictment preparation Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder bearing name of victim/witness Work product P-005978 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that victim/witness for Investigative privilege P-006050 indictment preparation Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder bearing name of victim/witness Work product P-006051 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that victim/witness for Investigative privilege P-006065 indictment preparation Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Page 9 of 23 EFTA00191373 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #2 File folder entitled "JANE DOE #4" containing Work product P-006066 meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury 6(e) Thru data related to that victim/witness for indictment Investigative privilege P-006220 preparation Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder entitled ""JANE DOE #12" containing Work product P-006221 meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and grand jury 6(e) Thru data related to that victim/witness for indictment Investigative privilege P-006222 preparation Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder entitled "CORRECTED PHONE Work product P-006223 RECORDS 5/31/07" containing meta-analysis of 6(e) Thru all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to all Investigative privilege P-006522 victims/witnesses for indictment preparation Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim Name] Phone Work product P-006523 Records" containing telephone records received 6(e) Thru in response to subpoena Investigative privilege P-006802 Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder entitled "Lists of Identified Phone Work product P-006803 Numbers" containing charts of information culled 6(e) Thru from grand jury materials, interviews, and other Investigative privilege P-006860 investigation, with attorney handwritten notes, Also contains information and and information to issue follow-up grand jury documents subject to privacy subpoena rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder entitled "EPSTEIN/KELLEN CELL Work product P-006861 PHONE RECORDS" containing documents 6(e) Thru received via subpoena with attorney handwritten Investigative privilege P-007785 notes and highlighting Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Page 10 of 23 EFTA00191374 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #2 Folder entitled "OLY GRAND JURY LOG: Work product P-007786 OLY-01 THROUGH OLY-50" containing 6(e) Thru subpoenas, correspondence regarding same, 6(e) Investigative privilege P-008120 letters, attorney handwritten notes regarding Also contains information and records received in response to subpoenas documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 Handwritten flight logs received in response to 6(e) P-008121 subpoena Investigative privilege Thru P-008139 Box #2 Grand jury presentation folder containing Work product P-008140 attorney handwritten notes, typed outline with 6(e) Thru additional handwritten notes, complete indictment Investigative privilege P-008298 package dated 2/19/2008, victim list with Also contains information and identifying information, photographs, and documents subject to privacy summary of activity rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #2 File folder entitled "FINAL AGREEMENTS" P-008299 containing subfolder entitled "Agrmts Filed in Thru State Court" (P-008300-P-008327 [not being P-008363 withheld as privileged — have been produced to opposing counsel]); signed Non-Prosecution Agreement, Addendum, and operative portion of 12/19/2007 Sanchez-Acosta letter (P-008328-P- 008343 [not being withheld as privileged — have been produced to opposing counsel]); subfolder entitled "12/19/07 Acosta-Sanchez Ltr" containing unredacted copies of that letter (P- 008344-P-008363 [pursuant to Court's Order, not being withheld as privileged — will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by 1 I1h Circuit]) Box #2 File folder entitled "Lacerda Immunity Request" 6(e) P-008364 containing internal memoranda, Justice Work Product Thru Department documentation, and subpoena Deliberative Process P-008382 regarding immunity request Investigative privilege Box #2 File folder containing March 18, 2008 grand jury Work product P-008383 presentation materials, including "Operation Leap 6(e) Thru Year Revised Indictment Summary Chart (by Investigative privilege P-008516 victim)," grand jury materials, draft indictments, Deliberative process victim reference list, grand jury subpoena log Also contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Page 11 of 23 EFTA00191375 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #2 6/25/2007 Letter from Gerald Lefcourt to Jeffrey P-008517 Sloman and Andrew Lourie Thru [pursuant to Court's Order, not being withheld as P-008535 privileged — will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by I Id' Circuit] Box #2 Handwritten attorney notes to prepare for Work product P-008536 interview of Jane Doe #2 Investigative Privilege Thru Contains information subject P-008542 to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 Handwritten attorney notes regarding May 8, Work product P-008543 2007 grand jury presentation 6(e) Thru Investigative privilege P-008549 Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "Most Recent Indictment & Work product P-008550 Good Cases" containing draft indictment and 6(e) Thru legal research Investigative privilege P-008615 Deliberative process Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "FBI Summary Charts" Work product P-008616 containing chart prepared at direction of AUSA, Attorney-Client Privilege Thru containing victim names, identifying information, 6(e) P-008686 summary of activity, and other information Investigative privilege relevant to indictment Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #4" Work product P-008687 containing phone records and meta-analysis of all 6(e) Thru phone, travel, and grand jury data related to that Investigative privilege P-008776 victim/witness for indictment preparation Contains information and documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #5" Work product P-008777 containing handwritten notes and meta-analysis 6(e) Thru of all phone, travel, and grand jury data related to Investigative privilege P-008808 that victim/witness for indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Page 12 of 23 EFTA00191376 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #6" Work product P-008809 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thai grand jury data related to that victim/witness for Investigative privilege P-008847 indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #7" Work product P-008848 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that victim/witness for Investigative privilege P-008862 indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #8" Work product P-008863 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that victim/witness for Investigative privilege P-008890 indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "Certified Copy of State Case" P-008891 containing certified copy ofEpstein state criminal Thru cases and change ofplea transcript [not being P-009103 withheld as privileged — copy provided to opposing counsel Box #2 File folder entitled "Meeting Timeline" Work product P-009104 containing Villafafia typed notes summarizing Deliberative process Thru meetings with opposing counsel prepared at P-009111 request of R. Alexander Acosta, with handwritten correction and typed guideline estimate Box #2 11/26/2008 Email from Roy Black to A. Marie P-009112 Villafafia and Karen Atkinson re Jeffrey Epstein Thru (work release) P-009113 [pursuant to Court's Order, not being withheld as privileged — will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by 11'" Circuit] Box #2 7/3/2008 Email from A. Marie Villafafia to Col. P-009114 M. Gauger at PBSO re Epstein work release with Thru attachment [not being withheld as privileged — P-009115 produced to opposing counsel] Box #2 12/6/2007 Letter from Jeffrey Sloman to Jay P. P-009116 Lefkowitz re Jeffrey Epstein (victim notification) Thru [pursuant to Court's Order, not being withheld as P-009125 privileged — will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by 11'" Circuit]) Page 13 of 23 EFTA00191377 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #9" Work product P-009126 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that victim/witness for Investigative privilege P-009134 indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe Work product P-009135 #13" containing meta-analysis of all phone, 6(e) Thru travel, and grand jury data related to that Investigative privilege P-009141 victim/witness for indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe Work product P-00914 IA #12" containing meta-analysis of all phone, 6(e) Thru travel, and grand jury data related to that Investigative privilege P-00914 IC victim/witness for indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "Adrian `Mucinka' Ross" Work product P-009142 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that individual for Investigative privilege P-009152 indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "Nadia Marcinkova" Work product P-009153 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that individual for Investigative privilege P-009156 indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #1" Work product P-009157 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that victim/witness for Investigative privilege P-009208 indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #2" Work product P-009209 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that victim/witness for Investigative privilege P-009213 indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Page 14 of 23 EFTA00191378 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #2 File folder entitled "[Victim name]/Jane Doe #3" Work product P-009214 containing meta-analysis of all phone, travel, and 6(e) Thru grand jury data related to that victim/wimess for Investigative privilege P-009271 indictment preparation Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this suit Box #2 File folder entitled "Purpose of Travel Cases" Work product P-009272 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-009354 Box #2 File folder entitled "Interstate Commerce Cases" Work product P-009355 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-009403 Box #2 File folder entitled "Attorney Conflict Research" Work product P-009404 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-009536 Box #2 File folder entitled "Mann Act/Travel to Have Work product P-009537 Sex w/Minor" containing attorney research and Thru handwritten notes P-009574 Box #2 File folder entitled "Travel Act" containing Work Product P-009575 attorney research and handwritten notes Thru P-009603 Box #2 File folder entitled "Florida Work Product P-009604 Prostitution/Lewdness Statutes" containing Thru attorney research and handwritten notes P-009711 Box #2 Booklet entitled "Attorney General Guidelines for P-009712 Victim and Witness Assistance" [not being Thru withheld as privileged — produced to opposing P-009819 counsel] Box #2 File folder entitled "Corporate Liability Rsrch" Work Product P-009820 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-009965 Box #2 File folder entitled "Research re Knowledge of Work Product P-009966 Age Unnecessary" containing attorney research 6(e) Thru and handwritten notes and copy of grand jury P-010096 subpoena Page 15 of 23 EFTA00191379 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #2 File folder entitled "Money Laundering" Work Product P-010097 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-010276 Box #2 File folder entitled "1960 & Aiding/Abetting" Work Product P-010277 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-010394 Box #2 File folder entitled "18 USC § 2255 Cases" Work Product P-010395 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-010488 Box #2 File folder entitled "Research re Overt Acts & Work Product P-010489 Witness Testimony" containing attorney research Thru and handwritten notes P410509 Box #2 File folder entitled "Extradition" containing Work Product P-010510 attorney research and handwritten notes Thru P-010525 Box #2 File folder entitled "Rsrch re Crime Victims Work Product P-010526 Rights" containing attorney research, handwritten Deliberative Process Thru notes, draft victim notification letter, and draft P-010641 correspondence to Jay Lefkowitz (Also contains a November 28, 2007 letter from Kenneth Starr to Alice S. Fisher; and a November 29, 2007 letter from Jay Lefkowitz to R. Alexander Acosta (P-010528 thru P-010530 and P-010556 thru P-010559). Pursuant to the Court's Order, these will be produced to opposing counsel upon lift of stay by 11th Circuit) Box #2 File folder entitled "Immunity" containing Work Product P-010642 attorney research on granting immunity to Thru witnesses P-01650 Box #2 File folder entitled "Research re G.J. Transcript" Work Product P-010651 containing attorney research and draft pleadings 6(e) Thru re compelling production of grand jury transcript Deliberative process P-010659 with subpoena Box #2 File folder entitled "Research re GJ Transcript" Work Product P-010660 containing grand jury subpoena, 6(e) letters, 6(e) Thru attorney research and correspondence related to P-010757 subpoena Page 16 of 23 EFTA00191380 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #2 File folder entitled "Original Proposed Ind." Work Product P-010758 containing draft indictment 6(e) Thru Deliberative process P-010793 Box #2 File folder entitled "Epstein" containing sample Work Product P-010794 indictments and attorney research re potential Thru charges with attorney notes P-010829 Box #2 File folder entitled "1591 & Money Laundering" Work Product P-010830 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-010853 Box #2 File folder entitled "18 USC 2425" containing Work Product P-010854 attorney research and handwritten notes Thru P-010876 Box #2 File folder entitled "Knowledge of Age" Work Product P-010877 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-010920 Box #2 File folder entitled "2423(b) Constitutionality and Work Product P-010921 Purpose of Travel" containing attorney research Thm and handwritten notes P-011049 Box #2 File folder entitled "Mistake not a Work Product P-011050 Defense" containing attorney research and Thru handwritten notes P-011212 Box #2 File folder entitled "Research re 'Pandering' Work Product P-011213 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-011237 Box #2 File folder entitled "Research re Grand Any Work Product P-011238 Instructions" containing attorney research and 6(e) Thru handwritten notes P-011319 Box #2 File folder entitled "Telephone = Facility of Work Product P-011320 Commerce" containing attorney research and Thru handwritten notes P-011361 Box #2 File folder entitled "Def of Prostitution" Work Product P-011362 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-011374 Page 17 of 23 EFTA00191381 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #2 File folder entitled "Relevant Florida Statutes" Work Product P-011375 containing attorney research and handwritten Thru notes P-011456 Box #2 File folder entitled "Unit ofProsecution Work Product P-011457 Research" containing attorney research and Thru handwritten notes P-011626 Box #3 File folder entitled "Attorney Notes" containing Work Product P-011627 attorney handwritten and typed notes Thru P-011662 Box #3 File folder entitled "Drafts" containing draft 6(e) P-011663 indictments with attorney handwritten notes, draft Work Product Thru internal memoranda, relevant witness interview Deliberative Process P-011698 and reports and grand jury material and attorney Investigative Privilege P-012189 thru handwritten notes Contains information subject P-012361 to privacy rights of victims (gap was who are not parties to this scanning error) Box #3 File folder entitled "6/9/09 Signed Indictment" 6(e) P-011699 containing signed indictment package dated Work product Thru 6/9/2009 with corrections Deliberative process P-011777 Box #3 File folder entitled "6/12/09 Victim Noti£ Log" Work product P-011778 containing chart with victim contact information Thru and attorney notes regarding dates and type of P-011788 contacts Box #3 File folder entitled "Breach Memo" containing Work product P-011789 memorandum analyzing breach ofNon- Deliberative process Thru Prosecution Agreement with attachments P-011879 Box #3 File folder entitled "Overt Act Lists" containing Work product P-011880 handwritten notes cross-checking all overt acts Attorney-client privilege Thru alleged in draft indictment by victim and typed Deliberative process P-011922 overt act summary charts for indictment 6(e) preparation Page 18 of 23 EFTA00191382 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #3 Folder entitled "Responses to Arguments from JE Work product P-011923 Counsel" containing: Deliberative process Thru ■ 7/13/2007 letter from Lilly Ann Sanchez 6(e) P-011966 to Andrew Lourie with handwritten Attorney-Client Privilege attorney (Lourie) notes; ■ 6/25/2007 letter from Gerald Lefcourt to Jeffrey Sloman, Matt Menchal, Andrew Lourie, and Marie Villafafla with handwritten attorney (Villafttfla) notes; ■ 6/25/2007 email from Andrew Lourie to Matt Menchel and Marie Villafana entitled "Thoughts on Lefcourt's letter" Handwritten and typed attorney (Villafafia) notes regarding main themes raised by Epstein counsel Box #3 Composition book entitled "Operation Leap Work product P-011967 Year" containing attorney handwritten notes Investigative privilege Thru regarding investigation and case strategy 6(e) P-012016 Contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 Motion of Jeffrey Epstein to Intervene and to 6(e) P-012017 Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas and Incorporated Thru Memorandum of Law P-012055 Box #3 Affidavit of Roy Black, Esq. in Support of 6(e) P-012056 Motion of Jeffrey Epstein to Intervene and to Thru Quash Grand Jury Subpoenas P-012088 Box #3 United States' Response to Motion of Jeffrey 6(e) P-012089 Epstein to Intervene and to Quash Grand Jury Thru Subpoenas and Cross-Motion to Compel P-012129 Box #3 Declaration of Joseph Recarey 6(e) P-012130 "Him P-012150 Box #3 Ex Pane Declaration Number One in Support of 6(e) P-012151 United States' Response to Motion to Quash Investigative Privilege Thru Subpoenas Also contains information P-012167 subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Page 19 of 23 EFTA00191383 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #3 Ex Parte Declaration Number Two in Support of 6(e) P-012168 United States' Response to Motion to Quash Investigative Privilege Thru Subpoenas P-012170 Box #3 Supplement to Ex Parte Declaration Number One 6(e) P-012171 in Support of United States' Response to Motion Investigative Privilege Thru to Quash Subpoenas Also contains information P-012173 subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 Draft of September 2009 letter from Marie Work Product P-012174 Villafafia to Roy Black regarding breach of Non Attorney-Client Privilege Thru Prosecution Agreement with handwritten attorney Deliberative Process P-012176 (Villafafia) notes Box #3 Undated handwritten attorney (Villafafia) notes Work Product P-012177 regarding negotiations and allegations Attorney-Client Privilege Thru Deliberative Process P-012178 Box #3 File Folder entitled "FBI G.J. Log" containing 6(e) P-012179 copy of FBI grand jury subpoena log with Work Product Thru attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes Investigative Privilege P-012188 Also contains information subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 File folder entitled "Key Documents" containing 6(e) P-012362 correspondence between AUSA and case agent Work Product Thru regarding indictment prep questions, victim Attorney-Client privilege P-012451 identification information, corrections to draft Investigative Privilege indictment, indictment preparation timeline, key Also contains information grand jury material subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 File folder entitled "Victim List" containing list Work Product P-012451 of victims with dates of birth and age information Investigative Privilege Thru Also contains information P-012452 subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Page 20 of 23 EFTA00191384 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #3 Complete indictment package marked "Originals Work-product P-012453 12112/07" Deliberative process Thru 6(e) P-0 I 2623 Also contains documents subject to investigative privilege Also contains documents subject to privacy rights of victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 Folder entitled "(Victims) Additional 302's" Investigative Privilege P-012624 containing reports of interviews conducted in Also contains documents Thru June 2007, October 2007, and March 2008. subject to privacy rights of P-012653 victims who are not parties to this litigation Box #3 3-ring binder entitled "Child Molesters: A Work-product P-012654 Behavioral Analysis" with attorney (Villafa0a) Thru handwritten notes P-012864 Box #3 Indictment preparation binder containing: Work Product P-012865 witness/victim list with identifying information, Deliberative Process Thru sexual activity summary, telephone call summary 6(e) P-013226 chart, attorney (Villafafia) handwritten notes, Also contains documents 302s, portions of state investigative file, attorney subject to investigative (Villafafia) typed notes, relevant pieces of grand privilege jury materials, telephone records/flight records Also contains documents analysis charts, victim/witness photographs, subject to privacy rights of DAVID records, NCICs, and related materials for victims who are not parties to persons identified as Jane Does #9, 10, 11, 12, 13, this litigation 14 Box #3 April 23, 2008 Memo from Jeffrey Sloman to Privacy Act P-013227 Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Reporting, Corrected Version of the previously submitted April 21, 2008 Letter to OPR Box #3 April 21, 2008 Letter from Jeffrey Sloman to Privacy Act P-013226 Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Thru Reporting P-013230 Box #3 April 22, 2008 Letter from A. Marie Villafafia to Privacy Act P-013231 Office of Professional Responsibility re Self- Thru Report of Allegation of Conflict ofInterest P-013239 Page 21 of 23 EFTA00191385 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #3 April 21, 2008 Letter from Jeffrey Sloman to Privacy Act P-013240 Office of Professional Responsibility re Self Thru Reporting with attachments P-013247 Box #3 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant Attorney-Client Privilege P-013248 General Counsel, Executive Office for United Thru States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First P-013251 Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated August 24 and August 29, 2011 Box #3 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant Attorney-Client Privilege P-013252 General Counsel, Executive Office for United Thru States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First P-013253 Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding Recusal matter, dated July 28, August 3, and August 24, 2011 Box #3 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant Attorney-Client Privilege P-013254 General Counsel, Executive Office for United Thru States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First P-013257 Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated August 24 and August 29, 2011 Box #3 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant Attorney-Client Privilege P-013258 General Counsel, Executive Office for United Thru States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First P-013259 Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated July 28 and August 3, 2011 Box #3 Email from Richard Sudder, Assistant General Attorney-Client Privilege P-013260 Counsel, Executive Office for United States Thru Attorneys, to Wifredo Ferrer (U.S. Attorney, P-013262 SDFL), Robert O'Neill (U.S. Attorney, MDFL), Benjamin Greenberg, (FAUSA, SDFL), and Lee Bentley (FAUSA, MDFL) regarding Formal Notice of Office-wide Recusal of Southern District of Florida dated August 24, 2011. CC's David Margolis (ODAG), Jay MadaSAEO), Thomas Anderson (USAEO), Tapken (USAEO), James Read (USAEO) Page 22 of 23 EFTA00191386 Bates Range Description Privilege(s) Asserted Box #3 Emails between Richard Sudder, Assistant Attorney-Client Privilege P413263 General Counsel, Executive Office for United Deliberative Process Thru States Attorneys, and Benjamin Greenberg, First Work Product P-013271 Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, regarding recusal of Southern District of Florida, dated July 29, 2011, with attached memorandum from A. Marie Villafafla to Benjamin Greenberg summarizing Jeffrey Epstein Investigation Box #3 Emails between Peter Mason, Executive Office Attorney-Client Privilege P-013272 for United States Attorneys, and Dexter Lee, Thru Southern District of Florida, seeking advice P-013278 regarding office-wide recusal, dated December 16 and 17, 2010, with attached letter from Paul Cassell to Wifredo A. Ferrer, dated December 10, 2010 Page 23 of 23 EFTA00191387 •...... .• •:z666:66 To: BigJlmL.aw@aol.com Bi imaaol.comj; Subject: RE: Sent: Tue 4 2006 5:51:08 PM From: Villafena, Ann Marie C. (USAFLS) Hi Jim -- Thank you for the e-mail, and I will even forgive the football reference. I was just set for trial, so the earliest I will be able to reschedule the testimony will be after Thanksgiving. I will give you a call to discuss theibrity Issue but I am concerned about other things we have talked about -- if Ms. is given immunity, will she be forthcoming and answer the questions? Or am I going to jump through hoops to get her immunity and then have to worry about filing motions to compel, motions for orders to show cause why she shouldn't be held in contempt, etc., etc.? As always, thank you for your assistance. Regards, Marie A. Marie Villafana Assistant U.S. Attorney 561 209-1047 Fax 581 820-8777 ann.ma rie.c.villafana@usdoj.gov From: BlgiimLaw@aol.com (mailto:BigJimLaw@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 12:00 PM To: Villafana, (USAFLS) Subject: Re: Sorry I t get back to you sooner. I have been out of town for several weeks. As to Miss she still does not wish to testify in this case and has a Fifth Amendment basis for er position. She wishes not to accept the "proffer letter " cover of Immunity, which again is her right. I think it Is a waste of time to have her appear Friday to just take. the Fifth. I suggest that you huddle with your people. (It is football season). If you want to push the issue you will have to get formal immati. I will accept service now and In the future for you so you don't have to chase down. Jim Eisenberg 08-80736-CV-MARRA P-013875 EFTA00191388 Memorandum Subject Date Re: Jeffrey Epstein Investigation July 26, 2011 To From Benjamin Greenberg, First Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafafia I. Introduction This memorandum summarizes the conflict of interest related to the investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") of additional crimes committed by Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"). The memo begins with a brief overview of the original investigation of Epstein, dubbed "Operation Leap Year"; summarizes the resolution of Operation Leap Year by the Southern District of Florida; and addresses the events following the resolution of Operation Leap Year, including the basis for the conflict. Lastly, the memo briefly addresses the additional crimes that the FBI wants to investigate. II. 'Operation Lean Year' The investigation of Jeffrey Epstein initially was undertaken by the City of Palm Beach Police D artment in response to a complaint received from the parents of a 14-year-old girl, from Royal Palm Beach. When and another girl began fighting at school because the other girl accused of being a prostitute, one of the school principals intervened. The principal searched urse and found $300 cash. The principal asked where the money came from. initialiiimed that she earned the money working at "Chik-Fil-A," which no one believed. then claimed that she made the money selling drugs; no one believed that either. finally admitted that she had been paid $300 to give a massage to a man on Palm Beach island. parents approached the Palm Beach Police Department ("PBPD") about pressing charges. PBPD began investigating the recipient of the massage, Jeffrey Epstein, and two of his assistants, Sarah Kellen and Nadia Marcinkova. PBPD identified 27 girls who went to EFTA00191389 Epstein's house to perform "massage service? (not including one licensed massage therapist). The girls' ages ranged from 14 years' old to 23 years' old. Some girls saw Epstein only once and some saw him dozens of times. The "massage services" performed also varied. Some girls were fully clothed while they massaged Epstein; some wore only their underwear; and some were fully nude. During all of these massages, Epstein masturbated himself and he would touch the girl performing the massage, usually fondling their breasts and touching their vaginas — either over their clothing or on their bare skin. Epstein often used a vibrator to masturbate the girls and digitally penetrated a number of them. For the girls who saw him more often, Epstein graduated to oral sex and vaginal sex. Epstein sometimes brought his assistant/girlfriend, Nadia Marcinkova, into the sexual activity. One of the girls described Marcinkova as Epstein's "sex slave". On October 18, 2005, PBPD obtained a search warrant with the assistance of the Palm Beach County State Attorney's Office ("PBSAO"). By this time, PBSAO had already been contacted by Epstein's cadre of lawyers. When PBPD arrived at Epstein's home two days later (10/20/05) to execute the search warrant, they found several items conspicuously missing. For example, computer monitors and keyboards were found, but the CPUs were gone. I Similarly, surveillance cameras were found, but they were disconnected and the videotapes were gone. Nonetheless, the search did recover some evidence of value, including message pads showing messages from many girls over a two year span. The messages show girls returning phone calls to confirm appointments to "work." Messages were taken by three of Epstein's "personal assistants." Photographs taken inside the home showed that the girls' descriptions of the layout of the home and master bedroom/bathroom area were accurate. PBPD also found massage tables and oils, the high school transcript of one of the girls, and sex toys. 'During a meeting, two of Epstein's attorneys, Gerald Lefcourt and Lilly Ann Sanchez, admitted that attorney Roy Black instructed Epstein to have the CPUs removed although they insisted that those instruction were given well in advance of the execution of the search warrant - not in response to a "leak." 2 EFTA00191390 In sum, the PBPD investigation showed that girls from Royal Palm Beach High School would be contacted by one of Epstein's assistants to make an appointment to "work." Up to three appointments each day would be made. The girls would travel to Epstein's home in Palm Beach where they would meet Epstein's chef and Epstein's assistant-usually Sarah Kellen-in the kitchen. The assistant would escort the girls upstairs to the master bedroom/bathroom area and set up the massage table and massage oils. The girl sometimes was instructed to remove her clothing. The assistant would leave and Epstein would enter the room wearing a robe. He would remove the robe and lie face down and nude on the massage table. Epstein would then instruct the girl on what to do and would ask her to remove her clothing. After some time, Epstein would turn over, so that he was lying face up. Epstein would masturbate himself and fondle the girl performing the massage. When Epstein climaxed, the massage was over, and the girl was instructed to get dressed and to go downstairs to the kitchen while Epstein showered. Epstein's assistant would be in the kitchen and the girl would be paid-usually $200-and if it was a "new" girl, the assistant would ask for the girl's phone number to contact her in the future.2 Girls were encouraged to find other girls to bring with them. If a girl brought another girl to perform a "massage," each girl would receive $200. Each time a girl returned to the house, Epstein would pressure the girl to go further sexually, advancing to oral sex and sexual intercourse. Epstein would pay more for these acts - in the words of one girl, "the more you do, the more you make." The PBPD investigation consisted primarily of sworn taped statements from the girls. When PBPD began having problems with PBSAO, they approached the FBI. The investigation was formally presented to the FBI and to the U.S. Attorney's Office after PBSAO "presented" the case to a state grand jury and the state grand jury returned an indictment charging Epstein only with one felony count of solicitation of [adult] prostitution. After the matter was presented to the U.S. Attorney's Office and there was a determination that federal statutes had been violated, FBI, ICE, and the U.S. Attorney's Office opened files. The federal investigation focused on the interstate nexus required for all of the federal violations, so a number of grand jury subpoenas were issued for telephone records, flight manifests, and credit card records. The federal agents also re-interviewed some of the girls. The agents delved into Epstein's history and interviewed other girls and obtained records to corroborate the girls' stories. FBI also interviewed 2Sometimes Epstein made the payment and asked for the phone number, sometimes it was the assistant. 3 EFTA00191391 girls who came forward after the PBSAO indictment was reported in the papers and the additional girls identified through those interviews. The attempt to handle secretly the federal case was doomed from the start when the Chief of the Palm Beach Police Department gave a letter to each of the victims identified through his investigation telling them that, because of his disappointment in the way that the PBSAO had handled the case, the matter had been referred to the FBI. Almost immediately, Epstein's attorneys began calling to request a meeting with the U.S. Attorney's Office. When one attorney was unable to schedule a meeting, Epstein hired another attorney who called up the chain of command until someone agreed to a meeting. Between January and May 2007, an indictment package was prepared, charging Epstein and three of his personal assistants with a number of child exploitation offenses. The case agent made several appearances before the grand jury. Attorneys for Epstein made several presentations to the U.S. Attorney's Office to convince the Office not to prosecute, and made allegations of prosecutorial misconduct against the line Assistant and the First Assistant U.S. Attorney. Epstein also challenged the legal analysis behind the prosecution, both within the U.S. Attorney's Office (up to the U.S. Attorney) and to the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section at the Justice Department. All of Epstein's challenges were considered and rejected. III. The Resolution of "Operation Leap Year' On September 24, 2007, Epstein signed a Non-Prosecution Agreement wherein the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida promised not to prosecute Epstein for the crimes that were the subject of the grand jury investigation if: (1) he pled guilty to two crimes in state court - the state felony prostitution charge and a state charge of procuring minors into prostitution, which would require Epstein to register as a sex offender; (2) he were sentenced to at least 18 months' imprisonment, and (3) he agreed to pay damages to the victims of his offenses. After signing this Agreement, Epstein and his counsel decided that they were dissatisfied with its terms, and again complained to the Justice Department, seeking review to the Deputy Assistant Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General. After those attempts also failed, on June 30, 2008, Epstein entered his guilty plea in state court and began serving his sentence. IV. Post-Resolution Events A few days before the plea and sentencing (in state court those occur on the same 4 EFTA00191392 day), the Assistant U.S. Attorney handling the matter contacted counsel for three of Epstein's identified victims and informed him of the upcoming court date, encouraging his clients to attend and be heard. They did not appear. On July 7, 2008, two of those victims filed suit against the United States in federal court claiming that their rights had been violated under the Crime Victims' Rights Act because they had not been consulted before the Office entered into the Non-Prosecution Agreement. (This will be referred to as the "CVRA Action.") After an initial flurry of activity, the Petitioners obtained a copy of the confidential Non-Prosecution Agreement, and the Court ordered that it be shared with all of the identified victims. After it was provided, the Petitioners and most of Epstein's victims focused on their civil suits against him. In 2009, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Fort Lauderdale initiated an investigation into a Ponzi scheme operated by Scott Rothstein through his law firm. As part of his Ponzi scheme, Rothstein told investors that his law firm represented several of Epstein's victims and that Epstein was willing to pay huge sums of money to avoid exposing his criminal activities. The attorney representing the victims in the CVRA Action, Brad Edwards ("Edwards"), worked at the Rothstein firm. Epstein sued Edwards, alleging that Edwards was part of the Ponzi scheme, and alleging that Edwards' attempts to subpoena some of Epstein's high-powered friends were done to increase the value of the Ponzi scheme, rather than for legitimate discovery purposes. In the summer of 2010, most of the civil suits against Epstein were settled, including the suits filed by the two victims in the CVRA Action. All of the settlements were confidential, so it is unknown how much each of the victims received. In September 2010, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra, who handled most of the civil cases and the CVRA Action, issued an Order closing the CVRA Action. Almost immediately thereafter, the Petitioners filed a Motion to Reopen, stating that they had obtained discovery through their civil suits against Epstein that showed that the U.S. Attorney's Office had violated their rights as victims. For several months, attempts were made to resolve the matter. In short, the victims have asked that the U.S. Attorney's Office disavow the Non-Prosecution Agreement, on the basis that the CVRA was violated, and bring charges against Epstein. Edwards has said that one of his clients repeatedly calls and asks him when Epstein is going to jail. One of the other attorneys on the case has suggested that emails he 5 EFTA00191393 considers to be embarrassing to the Office will not be disclosed if we re-open our investigation of Epstein and prosecute him. Herein lies the conflict. If the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida re-initiates a grand jury investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, it will be perceived - correctly or incorrectly - as having been done at the insistence of the victims in the CVRA Action. And Epstein will allege that any prosecution arising therefrom will have been undertaken in an effort to resolve the CVRA Action, not based upon the merits of the investigation itself. I. The FBI's Current Investigation The main focus of the FBI's current investigation is a victim, M, who refused to speak with agents during the "Operation Leap Year" investigation. Based upon her debriefing, Epstein engaged in several additional crimes in the Southern District of Florida and, more important) in several other Districts, with and other minor females. Epstein transported in his private airplanes to engage in sexual activity with him. Epstein also "pimped" to several of his other important friends, and transported her to those sexual encounters. This activity was not part of the initial investigation. also reported that, during the "Operation Leap Year" investigation, she was contacted by Epstein's investigators, lawyers, and Epstein himself, and offered payment to remain silent when contacted by the police. FBI agents are seeking grand jury subpoenas at this time to corroborate statement. They also are asking for permission to approach one of Epstein's "personal assistants," who was served with a target letter during the "Operation Leap Year" investigation, to give her a "de-target" letter and interview her. There are several other Districts that may have jurisdiction over the additional crimes under investigation. Epstein lived and still lives in the Southern District of New York; he engaged in sexual activity with in the S.D.N.Y.; and it is believed that he made the calls from the S.D.N.Y. to wherein he offered to pay her to keep her from speaking to law enforcement. When Epstein would fly into and out of New York, however, he used the airport in Teterboro, New Jersey, so the District of New Jersey also has jurisdiction over charges related to traveling in interstate commerce to engage in illicit sexual conduct and transporting minors in interstate commerce. reported 6 EFTA00191394 that Epstein engaged in sexual activity with her on his private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands and also had her engage in sexual activity with one of his friends on that island, so the District of the Virgin Islands also would have jurisdiction. also reported frequent sexual activity with Epstein in the District of New Mexico and the Central District of California. In both of those Districts there is evidence (from or other witnesses) of Epstein engaging in illegal sexual activity with other underage victims, as well. 7 EFTA00191395