DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
48.8 KB
Extraction Summary
7
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
7
Relationships
9
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Report excerpt
File Size:
48.8 KB
Summary
This document details communications and events surrounding a legal agreement, likely related to Jeffrey Epstein. It highlights disagreements over gag order provisions, the selection of a special master, and concerns raised by USAO representative Villafaña regarding the selection of a private attorney and defense attacks. The document mentions the signing of an NPA addendum by Epstein and his attorneys on October 29, 2007.
People (7)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Acosta | Individual involved in communication and assessment |
Sent an email with subject 'This has to stop', made an assessment and prediction, copied on an email.
|
| Villafaña | USAO representative |
Received email from Acosta, name printed as USAO representative, requested Sloman sign addendum, emailed Sloman thank...
|
| Sloman | Individual involved in communications and signing documents |
Received email from Acosta, sent new draft addendum to Lefkowitz, sent letter to special master, signed NPA addendum ...
|
| Lefkowitz | Attorney for Epstein |
Received draft addendum from Sloman.
|
| Epstein | Individual involved in a legal agreement |
Signed the NPA addendum.
|
| Sanchez | Attorney for Epstein |
Signed the NPA addendum.
|
| [the private attorney] | Proposed attorney to assist victims |
Villafaña had not met or spoken to this person, later decided against due to 'appearance problem'.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| USAO |
United States Attorney's Office, selected the special master, Villafaña was a representative, Sloman signed on its be...
|
Timeline (3 events)
Relationships (7)
Acosta sent email to Villafaña, Villafaña was copied on email with Acosta.
Sloman sent draft addendum to Lefkowitz, they spoke by phone.
Lefcourt is Epstein's attorney and signed NPA addendum.
Villafaña requested Sloman sign addendum, Villafaña emailed Sloman thanking him, Sloman responded to Villafaña's concerns.
Villafaña considered this attorney to assist victims but decided against due to 'appearance problem'.
Key Quotes (9)
"Why don't we agree to mutual recission [sic] and indict him?"Source
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
Quote #1
"This has to stop"Source
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
Quote #2
"Just read the letter."Source
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
Quote #3
"We specifically refused to include the provision saying that we would not communicate. If I recall the conference call, we told him we could not agree to a gag order using those words."Source
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
Quote #4
"The purpose of the agreement was not an out of court settlement. Seems that they can't take no. Let's talk re how to proceed. I'm not sure we will ever agree on a letter [to the special master about how to select an attorney representative] at this point."Source
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
Quote #5
"the advice and the pep talk"Source
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
Quote #6
"The funny thing is that I had never met (and still haven't met) or spoken to [the private attorney] before I asked him if he would be willing to take on this case.... But as soon as you mentioned the appearance problem, I saw where the problem would arise and agreed that the Special Master would be a safer route. I just worry that the defense's attacks on me could harm the victims."Source
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
Quote #7
"put an . . . insidious spin"Source
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
Quote #8
"I hope that you understand that these ad hominem attacks against you do not diminish in our eyes what you and the agents have accomplished."Source
DOJ-OGR-00023131.tif
Quote #9
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,330 characters)
Why don't we agree to mutual recission [sic] and indict him?
Acosta also weighed in, sending both Villafaña and Sloman an email with a subject line
that read "This has to stop," in which he stated:
Just read the letter.
1.
We specifically refused to include the provision saying that
we would not communicate. If I recall the conference call, we told
him we could not agree to a gag order using those words.
2.
The purpose of the agreement was not an out of court
settlement. Seems that they can't take no. Let's talk re how to
proceed. I'm not sure we will ever agree on a letter [to the special
master about how to select an attorney representative] at this point.
Notwithstanding Acosta's assessment and prediction, after Sloman sent to Lefkowitz a new
draft addendum and they spoke by phone, the parties reached agreement on the addendum's
terms.147
On October 25, 2007, Sloman sent a letter to the person whom the USAO had selected to
serve as special master, outlining the special master's duties. A few days later, on October 29,
2007, Epstein and his attorneys Lefcourt and Sanchez signed the NPA addendum. 148 Villafaña's
name was printed as the USAO representative, but at Villafaña's request, Sloman signed the
addendum for her on behalf of the USAO.
Villafaña later emailed Sloman thanking him for "the advice and the pep talk," which
apparently related to the defense attorneys' allegation of impropriety concerning her initial
selection of the private attorney to assist the victims. Villafaña explained to Sloman:
The funny thing is that I had never met (and still haven't met) or
spoken to [the private attorney] before I asked him if he would be
willing to take on this case.... But as soon as you mentioned the
appearance problem, I saw where the problem would arise and
agreed that the Special Master would be a safer route. I just worry
that the defense's attacks on me could harm the victims.
Sloman responded that defense counsel had "put an . . . insidious spin" on Villafaña's role in
proposing the private attorney, but Sloman added, "I hope that you understand that these ad
hominem attacks against you do not diminish in our eyes what you and the agents have
accomplished."
147
148
Acosta and Villafaña were copied on this email.
The Addendum is attached as Exhibit 4 to this Report.
93
DOJ-OGR-00023131
Acosta also weighed in, sending both Villafaña and Sloman an email with a subject line
that read "This has to stop," in which he stated:
Just read the letter.
1.
We specifically refused to include the provision saying that
we would not communicate. If I recall the conference call, we told
him we could not agree to a gag order using those words.
2.
The purpose of the agreement was not an out of court
settlement. Seems that they can't take no. Let's talk re how to
proceed. I'm not sure we will ever agree on a letter [to the special
master about how to select an attorney representative] at this point.
Notwithstanding Acosta's assessment and prediction, after Sloman sent to Lefkowitz a new
draft addendum and they spoke by phone, the parties reached agreement on the addendum's
terms.147
On October 25, 2007, Sloman sent a letter to the person whom the USAO had selected to
serve as special master, outlining the special master's duties. A few days later, on October 29,
2007, Epstein and his attorneys Lefcourt and Sanchez signed the NPA addendum. 148 Villafaña's
name was printed as the USAO representative, but at Villafaña's request, Sloman signed the
addendum for her on behalf of the USAO.
Villafaña later emailed Sloman thanking him for "the advice and the pep talk," which
apparently related to the defense attorneys' allegation of impropriety concerning her initial
selection of the private attorney to assist the victims. Villafaña explained to Sloman:
The funny thing is that I had never met (and still haven't met) or
spoken to [the private attorney] before I asked him if he would be
willing to take on this case.... But as soon as you mentioned the
appearance problem, I saw where the problem would arise and
agreed that the Special Master would be a safer route. I just worry
that the defense's attacks on me could harm the victims.
Sloman responded that defense counsel had "put an . . . insidious spin" on Villafaña's role in
proposing the private attorney, but Sloman added, "I hope that you understand that these ad
hominem attacks against you do not diminish in our eyes what you and the agents have
accomplished."
147
148
Acosta and Villafaña were copied on this email.
The Addendum is attached as Exhibit 4 to this Report.
93
DOJ-OGR-00023131
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document