DOJ-OGR-00023245.tif

A.
September - October 2007: The Case Agents Notify Some Victims about the
NPA, but Stop When the Case Agent Becomes Concerned about Potential
Impeachment
In transmitting the signed NPA to Villafaña on September 24, 2007, defense attorney
Lefkowitz asked Villafaña to "do whatever you can to prevent [the NPA] from becoming
public."297 Villafaña forwarded this email to Acosta, Lourie, and the new West Palm Beach
manager noting that, "I don't intend to do anything with it except put it in the case file." Acosta
responded that he "thought the [NPA] already binds us not to make [it] public except as required
by law or [FOIA]" and noted that because the USAO would not proactively inform the media
about the NPA, "this is the State Attorney[']s show."298 Acosta added, “In other words, what more
does he want?" Villafaña responded, "My guess is that if we tell anyone else (like the police chief
or FBI or the girls), that we ask them not to disclose." Lourie agreed, noting that “there really is
no reason to tell anyone all the details of the non pros or provide a copy. The [PBPD] Chief was
only concerned that he not get surprised by all this."299 Acosta responded that he would set up a
call on September 26, 2007, to talk "about who we can tell and how much. "300
Also on September 24, 2007, Villafaña emailed the new West Palm Beach manager to
inform him that once the attorney representative was appointed for the victims, she planned to
"meet with the girls myself to explain how the system [for obtaining relief under 18 U.S.C. § 2255]
will work." Villafaña also emailed Lefkowitz stating that she planned to discuss with him "what
I can tell [the attorney representative] and the girls about the agreement," and she assured
Lefkowitz that her office "is telling Chief Reiter not to disclose the outcome to anyone." Villafaña
also provided Lefkowitz with a list of potential candidates for the attorney representative position
and advocated for an attorney representative who would minimize press coverage of the matter.
On September 26, 2007, Villafaña emailed Lefkowitz to request guidance on informing the
victims about the NPA: “Can you give me a call. I am meeting with the agents and want to
give them their marching orders regarding what they can tell the girls." Villafaña told OPR that
because the government and the defense had not agreed on the attorney representative for the
victims, she reached out to the defense at the direction of either Acosta or Sloman in order to
coordinate how to inform the victims about the resolution of the case and the fact that there would
be an attorney to assist them in recovering monetary damages from Epstein. Villafaña told OPR
that the defense responded to her email by complaining to her supervisors that she should not be
297
Villafaña had assured Lefkowitz that the NPA "would not be made public or filed with the Court, but it would
remain part of our case file. It probably would be subject to a FOIA request, but it is not something that we would
distribute without compulsory process."
298 Acosta told OPR that he believed that the NPA "would see the light of day" because the victims would have
to "hear about [their § 2255 rights] from somewhere" and "given the press interest, eventually this would be FOIA'd."
299
Lourie told OPR that the § 2255 provisions of the NPA "that benefitted the victims were there for the victims
to take advantage of. and they did. How... they were going to receive that information and when they were going
to receive it is a different question, but there's no... issue with the fact that they were going to get that information."
OPR was unable to determine whether the call took place.
300
207
DOJ-OGR-00023245