EFTA00013778.pdf
176 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Email chain / legal correspondence
File Size:
176 KB
Summary
This email chain from March 2008 between federal prosecutors/officials discusses the complexities of the parallel state and federal cases against Jeffrey Epstein. It details Epstein's attempts to evade the stricter terms of a federal non-prosecution agreement (including sex offender registration and 18 months jail time) and reveals that prior to FBI involvement, local police were told he would receive only a misdemeanor with no jail time. The emails also contain specific evidence regarding a victim who was under 18 when Epstein engaged in sexual intercourse with her and gave her lingerie as a gift.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Defendant |
Subject of federal and state indictments; attempting to negotiate plea deal terms regarding registration, jail time, ...
|
| Redacted Senders/Recipients | Federal Prosecutors / DOJ Officials |
Discussing case strategy, plea negotiations, and coordination between state and federal cases.
|
| Assistant State Attorney (ASA) | State Prosecutor (Florida) |
Handling the state case; defense demanded federal prosecutors have no contact with them.
|
| Local Detective | Law Enforcement |
Investigating the state case.
|
| Victims | Witnesses/Survivors |
Two girls in state indictment (one also in federal); 18 other girls in federal indictment; victims going back to 2001.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| FBI |
Asked to step in because police were told Epstein would get a misdemeanor and no jail time.
|
|
| State Attorney's Office |
Florida prosecution office handling the state charges.
|
|
| The Office |
Refers to the US Attorney's Office/Federal Prosecutors putting together the non-prosecution agreement.
|
Timeline (3 events)
February and September 2005
Various
Epstein engaged in full sexual intercourse with a victim a few days shy of her 18th birthday.
Florida
Jeffrey Epstein
Victim
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction for state laws and state indictment.
|
Relationships (2)
Engaged in full sexual intercourse days before her 18th birthday; gave gifts including lingerie.
Defense demanded federal prosecutors have no contact with State Attorney's Office; haven't spoken in over 6 months.
Key Quotes (5)
"The victim from the state case who is referenced in the federal indictment told Epstein her true age and he engaged in full sexual intercourse with her a few days shy of her 18th birthday."Source
EFTA00013778.pdf
Quote #1
"For that birthday, he gave her a series of gifts, including lingerie."Source
EFTA00013778.pdf
Quote #2
"Before we got involved, the police were told that Epstein was going to plead to a misdemeanor and get no jail time. (That is one of the reasons why they asked the FBI to step in.)"Source
EFTA00013778.pdf
Quote #3
"He now wants to get a “suspended sentence” and/or home confinement, instead."Source
EFTA00013778.pdf
Quote #4
"Epstein is now subpoenaing victims for depositions who are not included in the state indictment... He seems to be trying to use that process to get information about the federal investigation."Source
EFTA00013778.pdf
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (6,094 characters)
From: [Redacted]
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:58:21 +0000
Importance: Normal
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:58:21 +0000
Importance: Normal
I will need to look into that, but I do know that there is a 3-year statute of limitations on the state prostitution charges. That limitations period has already run for several of our victims (we have victims going back to 2001). The girls who are charged in the state indictment saw him in February and September 2005.
I will get the other info to you asap. Give me about 30 minutes.
From: [Redacted]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 11:51 AM
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 11:51 AM
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
One more question – do you know when double jeopardy attaches under Florida law? More specifically, if the state charges were dropped now, could they be dropped without prejudice?
From: [Redacted]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:39 PM
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:39 PM
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
Hi [Redacted] – The state indictment is related to two girls. One of those girls is included in the federal indictment, the other is not. The state indictment charges solicitation of adult prostitution, it does not charge any child exploitation offense, despite the fact that, under Florida law, neither lack of knowledge of age nor affirmative misrepresentation of age by the victim is a defense.
The victim from the state case who is referenced in the federal indictment told Epstein her true age and he engaged in full sexual intercourse with her a few days shy of her 18th birthday. For that birthday, he gave her a series of gifts, including lingerie. The other 18 girls named in the current indictment are not part of the state indictment.
The state case currently has a trial date set for July. Before we got involved, the police were told that Epstein was going to plead to a misdemeanor and get no jail time. (That is one of the reasons why they asked the FBI to step in.) Since the federal investigation began, Epstein’s counsel have continued the case repeatedly on the basis that they cannot resolve that case until the federal case is resolved. As part of the non-prosecution agreement that the Office put together with Epstein, the federal case was supposed to be resolved if Epstein agreed to three main terms: (1) he had to plead to a state offense for which sex offender registration was required, specifically, the procurement of minors to engage in prostitution; (2) he had to agree to an 18-month term of incarceration; and (3) he had to agree to pay restitution and damages to the victims. After the agreement was signed, he then tried to escape all three requirements.
He objected to pleading to the state charge, claiming that the facts did not apply, and asked to plead to a non-registrable offense instead. When we responded that there were four other registrable offenses where the facts certainly fit, those were rejected because (1) they required registration and (2) the state sentencing guidelines for those offenses were too high.
He tried to arrange to get out on work release, which would allow him to “work” anywhere he liked during the day and sleep in a halfway house, rather than a jail, at night. When he learned that sex offenders weren’t allowed to be a part of the work release program, he started complaining about the jail time. He now wants to get a “suspended sentence” and/or home confinement, instead.
He complained that he should be able to fully litigate the issues of liability and damages with regard to the third term of the agreement, despite his agreement directly to the contrary.
With respect to the current status of the state case, other than the new trial date, all that I know is that Epstein is now subpoenaing victims for depositions who are not included in the state indictment. (Under Florida law, defense counsel are allowed to depose witnesses, including victims, prior to trial.) He seems to be trying to use that process to get information about the federal investigation. I do not know whether Epstein’s misdemeanor deal is back on the table because the defense demanded that we have no contact with the State Attorney’s Office, so I haven’t spoken with the ASA in over 6 months.
I wish I had more information to give you. If you would like me to reach out to either the local detective on the state case or the Assistant State Attorney, please let me know. Or, if you would like their contact info, I can forward that to you, too.
Thank you. I will be back in the office tomorrow and you can call me there with any other questions.
From: [Redacted]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 11:49 AM
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 11:49 AM
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
Two quick questions: Could you clarify whether any of the victims that are included in the state indictment would also be included in any federal indictment? If you know, what is the status of the state case?
Thanks,
[Redacted]
[Redacted]
From: [Redacted]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 7:17 PM
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 7:17 PM
To: [Redacted]
Cc: [Redacted]
Subject: RE: Follow up
I’m running out the door, but I wanted to get a response off. Sorry for not updating you sooner. The meeting went well – enough. They wanted to “complete the record” with some written material, which we expect to have by Monday. We’re putting together our response to their arguments and we should be ready to issue it as soon as we get and digest their final submissions. Assuming we get the submissions by Monday, I expect to have our position to you by the middle of next week.
So far we’ve not had any questions we couldn’t answer with the materials at hand, but we’ll reach out to you promptly if we need to.
Thanks,
[Redacted]
[Redacted]
From: [Redacted]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 6:30 PM
To: [Redacted]
Subject: Follow up
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 6:30 PM
To: [Redacted]
Subject: Follow up
Hi [Redacted] – Sorry to bother you. I know you had mentioned that you might have some questions for me after your meeting. I am going to be out most of the day tomorrow and then back on Friday and then I will be out for a week, so I wanted to get stuff to you before I leave. Do you need anything from me or the investigators?
Thanks.
[Redacted]
[Redacted]
EFTA00013778
EFTA00013779
EFTA00013780
EFTA00013779
EFTA00013780
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document