HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025705.jpg
2.18 MB
Extraction Summary
7
People
5
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal correspondence / letter
File Size:
2.18 MB
Summary
A legal letter dated May 27, 2008, from Kenneth Starr and Joe Whitley to Mark Filip regarding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. The attorneys argue that the prosecution appears politically motivated due to Epstein's friendship with Bill Clinton and claim the USAO would not prosecute a standard 'John' in this manner. They request a review of the case and the tolling of an 'arbitrary' deadline set by prosecutor Mr. Sloman.
People (7)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mark Filip | Recipient |
Addressed as 'Honorable', likely a DOJ official receiving the complaint.
|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Subject/Client |
Described as a 'highly successful, self-made businessman and philanthropist' facing prosecution.
|
| Bill Clinton | Former President |
Mentioned to suggest the prosecution is politically motivated due to Epstein's 'close personal association' with him.
|
| Alexander Acosta | U.S. Attorney |
Accused of shutting down communication; quoted as being 'sympathetic' to federalism concerns but limited by Washingto...
|
| Mr. Sloman | Prosecutor/Official |
Sent a letter prohibiting contact with Acosta; demanding a deadline for the plea.
|
| Kenneth W. Starr | Defense Attorney |
Signatory; representing Epstein via Kirkland & Ellis LLP.
|
| Joe D. Whitley | Defense Attorney |
Signatory; representing Epstein via Alston & Bird LLP.
|
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| USAO |
United States Attorney's Office; criticized for inappropriate conduct and imposing deadlines.
|
|
| CEOS |
Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (DOJ); mentioned as an avenue for resolving issues.
|
|
| Kirkland & Ellis LLP |
Law firm representing Epstein (Kenneth Starr).
|
|
| Alston & Bird LLP |
Law firm representing Epstein (Joe Whitley).
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Source of the document (indicated by Bates stamp).
|
Timeline (1 events)
July 8, 2008
Deadline date presently set by the state court Judge for a plea of guilty.
State Court
Jeffrey Epstein
State Court Judge
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Source of enforcement policies limiting U.S. Attorney Acosta.
|
Relationships (3)
Document states Epstein entered public arena 'only by virtue of his close personal association with former President Bill Clinton.'
Signatory on letter representing Epstein.
Letter implies Sloman is managing communication access to Acosta.
Key Quotes (4)
"Mr. Epstein is a highly successful, self-made businessman and philanthropist who entered the public arena only by virtue of his close personal association with former President Bill Clinton."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025705.jpg
Quote #1
"There is little doubt in our minds that the USAO never would have contemplated a prosecution in this case if Mr. Epstein were just another 'John.'"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025705.jpg
Quote #2
"Thus, it places Mr. Epstein in the highly unusual position of having to demand that the State acquiesce to a more severe punishment than it had already determined was appropriate."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025705.jpg
Quote #3
"U.S. Attorney Acosta previously has stated that he is 'sympathetic' to our federalism-related concerns..."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025705.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,603 characters)
Honorable Mark Filip
May 27, 2008
Page 2
May 27, 2008
Page 2
to a charge that the State Attorney has not, despite a two year investigation, determined to be
appropriate. Mr. Epstein’s counsel must also successfully expedite a plea of guilty to this charge
on a date prior to July 8, 2008, which is the date presently set by the state court Judge.
appropriate. Mr. Epstein’s counsel must also successfully expedite a plea of guilty to this charge
on a date prior to July 8, 2008, which is the date presently set by the state court Judge.
Further, the unnecessary deadline is even more problematic because Mr. Epstein’s effort
to reconcile the state charge and sentence with the terms of the Agreement requires an unusual
and unprecedented threatened application of federal law. Thus, it places Mr. Epstein in the
highly unusual position of having to demand that the State acquiesce to a more severe
punishment than it had already determined was appropriate.
to reconcile the state charge and sentence with the terms of the Agreement requires an unusual
and unprecedented threatened application of federal law. Thus, it places Mr. Epstein in the
highly unusual position of having to demand that the State acquiesce to a more severe
punishment than it had already determined was appropriate.
We have attempted to resolve these and other issues through the USAO and CEOS,
including raising our concerns about the USAO’s inappropriate conduct with respect to this
matter. But those avenues have now been shut down. Mr. Sloman’s letter purports to prohibit
any further contact between Mr. Epstein’s defense team and U.S. Attorney Acosta, and instead
requires us to communicate with the USAO only though Mr. Sloman’s subordinates.
including raising our concerns about the USAO’s inappropriate conduct with respect to this
matter. But those avenues have now been shut down. Mr. Sloman’s letter purports to prohibit
any further contact between Mr. Epstein’s defense team and U.S. Attorney Acosta, and instead
requires us to communicate with the USAO only though Mr. Sloman’s subordinates.
While it pains us to say this, this misguided prosecution from the outset gives the
appearance that it may have been politically motivated. Mr. Epstein is a highly successful, self-
made businessman and philanthropist who entered the public arena only by virtue of his close
personal association with former President Bill Clinton. There is little doubt in our minds that
the USAO never would have contemplated a prosecution in this case if Mr. Epstein were just
another “John.”
appearance that it may have been politically motivated. Mr. Epstein is a highly successful, self-
made businessman and philanthropist who entered the public arena only by virtue of his close
personal association with former President Bill Clinton. There is little doubt in our minds that
the USAO never would have contemplated a prosecution in this case if Mr. Epstein were just
another “John.”
U.S. Attorney Acosta previously has stated that he is “sympathetic” to our federalism-
related concerns, but he has taken the position that his authority is limited by enforcement
policies set forth in Washington, D.C. As expressed in our prior communication to you, we
believe that a complete and independent appraisal and resolution of this case most appropriately
would be undertaken by your Office—beginning with the rescission of the arbitrary, unfair, and
unprecedented deadline that Mr. Sloman demands to have imposed in this case. At the very
least, we would appreciate a tolling of the arbitrary timeline imposed on our client by the USAO
in order to allow time for your office to consider our request that you undertake a review of this
case.
related concerns, but he has taken the position that his authority is limited by enforcement
policies set forth in Washington, D.C. As expressed in our prior communication to you, we
believe that a complete and independent appraisal and resolution of this case most appropriately
would be undertaken by your Office—beginning with the rescission of the arbitrary, unfair, and
unprecedented deadline that Mr. Sloman demands to have imposed in this case. At the very
least, we would appreciate a tolling of the arbitrary timeline imposed on our client by the USAO
in order to allow time for your office to consider our request that you undertake a review of this
case.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Respectfully submitted,
[Signature]
Kenneth W. Starr
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Kenneth W. Starr
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
[Signature]
Joe D. Whitley
Alston & Bird LL
Joe D. Whitley
Alston & Bird LL
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025705
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document