HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025355.jpg
2.2 MB
Extraction Summary
6
People
5
Organizations
3
Locations
2
Events
3
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal correspondence / letter
File Size:
2.2 MB
Summary
This document is page 3 of a letter from Jeffrey Epstein's defense team to Mark Filip, dated May 19, 2008. The text argues that the case against Epstein is a local solicitation of prostitution matter that should be handled by the State Attorney in Palm Beach, rather than federal prosecutors (USAO). The defense claims federal involvement is politically motivated by Epstein's connection to Bill Clinton and accuses federal prosecutors of leaking information to the New York Times and interfering with state plea negotiations.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mark Filip | Recipient (Honorable) |
Addressee of the letter, likely a DOJ official.
|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Subject/Defendant |
The client being defended; described as having no prior criminal history.
|
| Bill Clinton | Former President |
Mentioned to explain sudden media interest in Epstein due to their perceived friendship.
|
| Jay Lefkowitz | Defense Team Member |
Mentioned in footnote 1 as having reviewed a reporter's notes.
|
| New York Times reporter | Journalist |
Recipient of leaked sensitive information from federal prosecutors.
|
| First Assistant | Federal Prosecutor (implied) |
Former member of a boutique law firm now bringing civil lawsuits against Epstein.
|
Organizations (5)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States Attorney's Office (USAO) |
Federal prosecutors in Miami accused of interfering with the state case.
|
|
| State Attorney's Office |
Palm Beach County prosecutors handling the state investigation.
|
|
| Department of Justice |
Federal agency whose involvement the letter questions.
|
|
| New York Times |
Media outlet that received leaks.
|
|
| First Assistant's former boutique law firm |
Firm bringing civil lawsuits against Epstein.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Prior to May 19, 2008
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
General location of legal practice mentioned.
|
|
|
Location of federal prosecutors.
|
|
|
Location of the state investigation and alleged crimes.
|
Relationships (3)
Letter states media interest spiked after it was 'widely perceived by the public that he was a close friend of former President Bill Clinton.'
Footnote 1 identifies Lefkowitz as 'One of the other members of Mr. Epstein's defense team'.
Letter describes USAO interfering with State resolution and demanding harsher punishment.
Key Quotes (5)
"The facts in this case all revolve around the classic state crime of solicitation of prostitution."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025355.jpg
Quote #1
"Mr. Epstein has never been the subject of general media interest until a few years ago, after it was widely perceived by the public that he was a close friend of former President Bill Clinton."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025355.jpg
Quote #2
"The conduct at issue is simply not within the purview of federal jurisdiction and lies outside the heartland of the three federal statutes that have been identified by prosecutors---18 U.S.C. §§ 1591, 2422(b), and 2423(b)."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025355.jpg
Quote #3
"Federal prosecutors then leaked highly sensitive information about the case to a New York Times reporter."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025355.jpg
Quote #4
"Although some of the women alleged to be involved were 16 and 17 years of age, several of these women openly admitted to lying to Mr. Epstein about their age in their recent sworn statements."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025355.jpg
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,845 characters)
Honorable Mark Filip
May 19, 2008
Page 3
May 19, 2008
Page 3
private practice in South Florida with personal relationships to some of the prosecutors involved.
Federal prosecutors then leaked highly sensitive information about the case to a New York
Times reporter.¹ The immediate result of this confluence of extraordinary circumstances is an
onslaught of civil lawsuits, all save one brought by the First Assistant's former boutique law firm
in Miami.
Federal prosecutors then leaked highly sensitive information about the case to a New York
Times reporter.¹ The immediate result of this confluence of extraordinary circumstances is an
onslaught of civil lawsuits, all save one brought by the First Assistant's former boutique law firm
in Miami.
The facts in this case all revolve around the classic state crime of solicitation of
prostitution.² The State Attorney's Office in Palm Beach County had conducted a diligent
investigation, convened a Grand Jury that returned an indictment, and made a final determination
about how to proceed. That is where, in our federal republic, this matter should rest.
Mr. Epstein faces a felony conviction in state court by virtue of his conduct, and the only reason
the State has not resolved this matter is that the federal prosecutors in Miami have continued to
insist that we, Mr. Epstein's counsel, approach and demand from the State Attorney's Office a
harsher charge and a more severe punishment than that Office believes are appropriate under the
circumstances. Yet despite the USAO's refusal to allow the State to resolve this matter on the
terms the State has determined are appropriate, the USAO has not made any attempt to
coordinate its efforts with the State. In fact, the USAO mandated that any federal agreement
would be conditioned on Mr. Epstein persuading the State to seek a criminal punishment unlike
that imposed on other defendants within the jurisdiction of the State Attorney for similar
conduct.
prostitution.² The State Attorney's Office in Palm Beach County had conducted a diligent
investigation, convened a Grand Jury that returned an indictment, and made a final determination
about how to proceed. That is where, in our federal republic, this matter should rest.
Mr. Epstein faces a felony conviction in state court by virtue of his conduct, and the only reason
the State has not resolved this matter is that the federal prosecutors in Miami have continued to
insist that we, Mr. Epstein's counsel, approach and demand from the State Attorney's Office a
harsher charge and a more severe punishment than that Office believes are appropriate under the
circumstances. Yet despite the USAO's refusal to allow the State to resolve this matter on the
terms the State has determined are appropriate, the USAO has not made any attempt to
coordinate its efforts with the State. In fact, the USAO mandated that any federal agreement
would be conditioned on Mr. Epstein persuading the State to seek a criminal punishment unlike
that imposed on other defendants within the jurisdiction of the State Attorney for similar
conduct.
From the inception of the USAO's involvement in this case, which at the end of the day
is a case about solicitation of prostitution within the confines of Palm Beach County, Florida, we
have asked ourselves why the Department of Justice is involved. Regrettably, we are unable to
suggest any appropriate basis for the Department's involvement. Mr. Epstein has no criminal
history whatsoever. Also, Mr. Epstein has never been the subject of general media interest until
a few years ago, after it was widely perceived by the public that he was a close friend of former
President Bill Clinton.
is a case about solicitation of prostitution within the confines of Palm Beach County, Florida, we
have asked ourselves why the Department of Justice is involved. Regrettably, we are unable to
suggest any appropriate basis for the Department's involvement. Mr. Epstein has no criminal
history whatsoever. Also, Mr. Epstein has never been the subject of general media interest until
a few years ago, after it was widely perceived by the public that he was a close friend of former
President Bill Clinton.
The conduct at issue is simply not within the purview of federal jurisdiction and lies
outside the heartland of the three federal statutes that have been identified by prosecutors---18
U.S.C. §§ 1591, 2422(b), and 2423(b).
outside the heartland of the three federal statutes that have been identified by prosecutors---18
U.S.C. §§ 1591, 2422(b), and 2423(b).
_________________
1 One of the other members of Mr. Epstein's defense team, Jay Lefkowitz, has personally reviewed the reporter's
contemporaneous notes.
contemporaneous notes.
2 Although some of the women alleged to be involved were 16 and 17 years of age, several of these women
openly admitted to lying to Mr. Epstein about their age in their recent sworn statements.
openly admitted to lying to Mr. Epstein about their age in their recent sworn statements.
A001440
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025355
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025355
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document