Lefkowitz
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Epstein
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional adversarial |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Professional adversarial |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Starr
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Client |
7
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Adversarial negotiating |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional opposing counsel |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Starr
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
jeevacation@gmail.com
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
David
|
Acquaintance |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Villafana
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lourie
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional negotiating parties |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional prosecutor defense counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Meeting participants |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Andrew Oosterbaan
|
Opposing counsel negotiation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Oosterbaan
|
Adversarial professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007-12-07 | N/A | Starr and Lefkowitz submitted 'independent ethics opinions' to Acosta. | N/A | View |
| 2007-12-07 | N/A | Starr and Lefkowitz send 'ethics opinions' to Acosta complaining about federal investigation and ... | N/A | View |
| 2007-12-05 | Communication | Starr and Lefkowitz sent a letter to Acosta reaffirming the NPA. | N/A | View |
| 2007-11-30 | Communication | Acosta replied to Lefkowitz's letter and also sent a letter to Starr setting a deadline for holdi... | N/A | View |
| 2007-11-29 | Communication | Lefkowitz sent a letter to Acosta objecting to the draft notification letter. | N/A | View |
| 2007-11-28 | N/A | Sloman instructs Villafaña to provide Lefkowitz with draft victim notification letter. | N/A | View |
| 2007-11-28 | Communication | Villafaña provided Lefkowitz with the draft victim notification letter at Sloman's instruction. | N/A | View |
| 2007-11-21 | Meeting | Lefkowitz informed Acosta and Sloman that Starr had placed a call to Fisher. | N/A | View |
| 2007-11-21 | N/A | Unscheduled Meeting: Defense discussion of victims’ attorney representative procedure | Unknown | View |
| 2007-10-23 | Legal communication | Lefkowitz sent a letter describing three specific concessions he claimed Acosta made during the b... | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-23 | Communication | Lefkowitz sent Acosta a letter stating that Epstein expected to enter a guilty plea in state court. | state court | View |
| 2007-10-23 | Meeting | A breakfast meeting to discuss the Epstein case and NPA. | Miami | View |
| 2007-10-12 | Meeting | Acosta has breakfast meeting with Lefkowitz. | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-12 | Meeting | A breakfast meeting between Acosta and Lefkowitz where assurances regarding the Epstein case were... | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-12 | Meeting | A breakfast meeting between Acosta and Lefkowitz that drew criticism. Lefkowitz later claimed Aco... | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-12 | N/A | Breakfast meeting between Acosta and Lefkowitz. | Marriott hotel, West Palm B... | View |
| 2007-10-12 | N/A | Negotiations for NPA addendum language, including selection of attorney representative and reimbu... | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-12 | N/A | Breakfast meeting between Acosta and Lefkowitz, followed by Acosta communicating with Sloman. | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-12 | N/A | Meeting: Defense discussion of NPA terms and likely appeal to Department | Unknown | View |
| 2007-10-12 | Negotiation | Ongoing negotiations via email and phone calls regarding the language of the NPA addendum. | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-12 | N/A | Acosta and Defense Attorney Lefkowitz Meet for Breakfast | Marriott hotel in West Palm... | View |
| 2007-10-10 | Communication | Lefkowitz sent Acosta a letter arguing against direct contact with victims by federal agents. | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-10 | N/A | Lefkowitz sent a six-page letter to Acosta expressing disagreements with Villafaña regarding the ... | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-05 | Communication | Defense attorney Lefkowitz sent Villafaña a letter responding to the USAO’s special master proposal. | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-01 | N/A | Negotiations on NPA Addendum | USAO / Remote | View |
DOJ-OGR-00021283.jpg
This legal document details the negotiations for a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) for Epstein. It shows Epstein's attorney, Lefkowitz, arguing against certain terms and proposing alternatives to prosecutors Acosta, Lourie, and Villafaña. The document includes a direct email from Lefkowitz to Acosta questioning the rejection of a plea deal and concludes with the defense introducing a confidentiality clause into the NPA for the first time.
DOJ-OGR-00021282.jpg
This legal document details communications from Jeffrey Epstein's defense team, specifically Sanchez and Lefkowitz, to prosecutors Acosta and Lourie on September 22-23, 2007. The defense vehemently argues against a sexual offender registration requirement, claiming it was based on a 'misunderstanding' from a September 12 meeting where they were allegedly told by prosecutors Krischer and Belohlavek that the charge was not registrable. The document contains excerpts from emails where the defense calls the registration a 'life sentence' and pleads for reconsideration.
DOJ-OGR-00021278.jpg
This legal document details a critical point in the plea negotiations for Jeffrey Epstein around September 20, 2007. It shows Epstein's defense team rejecting a federal plea agreement to pursue a "state-only" deal, primarily to avoid the federal sexual offender registration requirement. The document captures the internal communications among prosecutors, including Villafaña, Lourie, Acosta, and State Attorney Barry Krischer, as they react to the defense's shift in strategy and establish a hard deadline for filing charges.
DOJ-OGR-00021275.jpg
This document details the plea agreement negotiations in the Epstein case on September 19, 2007. It outlines the communications between prosecutor Villafaña and defense counsel Lefkowitz, including Villafaña's push to finalize a deal and Lefkowitz's submission of a 'redline' draft with specific terms. The document also reveals the involvement of Villafaña's colleague, Lourie, who reviewed the draft agreement and questioned certain provisions.
DOJ-OGR-00021272.jpg
This legal document from a court filing details plea negotiations concerning Jeffrey Epstein on September 18, 2007. Prosecutor Villafaña rejected a proposal from Epstein's attorney, Lefkowitz, for a 12-month sentence, insisting the U.S. Attorney required at least 18 months. The document includes a detailed email from Villafaña to her colleagues outlining the stalled negotiations and subsequent discussions with Lefkowitz about an alternative plea structure involving two separate charges.
DOJ-OGR-00021270.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the plea negotiations between prosecutor Villafaña and Epstein's counsel, Lefkowitz. It outlines the strategy to structure state and federal sentencing to manipulate jurisdiction for prison purposes without alerting the judge. It also explains Villafaña's justification for the non-prosecution agreement covering co-conspirators, stating that the USAO viewed Epstein as the priority and wished to avoid highlighting uncharged conduct to the court.
DOJ-OGR-00021269.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the 2007 plea negotiations between the US Attorney's Office (Villafaña, Sloman) and Epstein's defense (Lefkowitz). It highlights a specific email from Villafaña suggesting a Miami venue to minimize press coverage, which was later scrutinized during CVRA litigation. Crucially, it details the defense's counter-proposal to include immunity for four female assistants who facilitated Epstein's crimes, protection from immigration proceedings for two of them, and the withdrawal of legal processes seeking Epstein's computers.
DOJ-OGR-00021262.jpg
This legal document details events in the Jeffrey Epstein case from 2007, focusing on the circulation of a draft non-prosecution agreement (NPA) by USAO attorney Villafaña. It describes a key meeting on September 7, 2007, where Epstein's defense attorneys, including Starr, met with prosecutors, including Acosta, to argue against federal charges. Starr specifically appealed to Acosta by highlighting their shared experience as Senate-confirmed officials.
DOJ-OGR-00021212.jpg
This document provides a timeline of key events in the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein from May 2006 to October 2008. It details the opening of the investigation, meetings between prosecutors and Epstein's counsel, the decision to offer a state-based resolution, and the signing of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). The timeline concludes with Epstein's guilty plea in state court, a subsequent legal challenge by a victim (Jane Doe), and the start of Epstein's work release program.
DOJ-OGR-00021191.jpg
This document is a table of contents from a legal filing, detailing the timeline of plea negotiations in the Jeffrey Epstein case from July to September 2007. It outlines key events, including meetings between the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO), the FBI, and Epstein's defense team, and chronicles the evolution of the plea agreement terms, such as the reduction of the proposed incarceration period. The document highlights the roles of specific attorneys, including Acosta, Villafaña, and Lourie, in the negotiation process.
DOJ-OGR-00010398.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, defends the court's decision to reject the defendant's proposed jury instructions. The court argues the requested instructions were unresponsive, redundant, and legally inaccurate, particularly the claim that sexual activity outside New York could not form the basis for the charges. The document asserts that the existing jury charge correctly focused the inquiry on the violation of New York Penal Law Section 130.55, specifically concerning the overt act of transporting the victim, Jane, from Florida to New York for the purpose of sexual abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00003312.jpg
This document details communications from late June 2008 concerning Jeffrey Epstein's plea agreement. It begins with a letter from Roth to Epstein's counsel, Starr and Lefkowitz, confirming that federal prosecution is appropriate, and then shifts to prosecutor Villafaña's efforts to enforce the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). Villafaña expresses strong suspicion that Epstein's attorneys are misrepresenting the terms of his confinement, telling her he would be in a jail 24/7 while planning for him to be at a less restrictive 'stockade', which she reports to a colleague, Sloman, as a violation of their agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00003310.jpg
This document page details the legal maneuvering in May 2008 regarding the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. It describes how Epstein's lawyers (Starr and Whitley) petitioned the Deputy Attorney General to review the case, arguing that federal involvement was unwarranted and politically motivated due to Epstein's 'close ties' to former President Bill Clinton. The page also notes that the USAO, under instruction from the Deputy AG's office, postponed a June 2 deadline for Epstein's plea agreement to allow for this high-level review.
DOJ-OGR-00003303.jpg
This document details events in early January 2008 concerning the Jeffrey Epstein case, starting with the postponement of a plea hearing due to issues with the state charge. It describes a meeting where defense attorney Sanchez alleged a media leak by the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) and pushed for a lenient plea deal, followed by a phone call where Epstein's full legal team reiterated their desire for a 'watered-down resolution'. Amid these negotiations, USAO personnel expressed concern about delays and initiated a full internal review of the investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00003293.jpg
This document, a page from a legal filing, details the contentious negotiations between federal prosecutors (led by Acosta) and Jeffrey Epstein's defense counsel (Lefkowitz) regarding an addendum to a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) in October 2007. It describes the defense's successful request to postpone Epstein's state guilty plea and the prosecution's growing frustration with the defense for revisiting settled issues. The prosecutors also express suspicion that the defense's delay tactics were motivated by a new civil lawsuit filed against Epstein in New York.
DOJ-OGR-00003292.jpg
This document details communications between U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta and Epstein's attorney, Jay Lefkowitz, in late 2007 regarding Epstein's non-prosecution agreement (NPA). It focuses on a controversial breakfast meeting and subsequent letters where Lefkowitz claimed Acosta promised non-interference by federal authorities, a claim Acosta's office refuted in a draft response as "inaccurate" and tantamount to a "gag order." The text highlights conflicting accounts and the external criticism surrounding Acosta's handling of the case, contrasting his version of events with media reports.
DOJ-OGR-00003282.jpg
This page from a DOJ OPR report details the specific negotiations regarding Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It highlights the inclusion of the controversial clause granting immunity to 'any potential co-conspirator,' which AUSA Villafaña added and DOJ official Lourie failed to reject, despite Lourie explicitly rejecting a separate request for an immigration waiver. The document also records Lourie's later admission to OPR that the broad non-prosecution agreement likely stemmed from U.S. Attorney Acosta's reluctance to charge Epstein at all.
DOJ-OGR-00003272.jpg
This legal document details prosecutor Villafaña's communications and justifications regarding a plea deal for Jeffrey Epstein. Villafaña explains to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) her strategic decisions, including the structuring of state and federal sentences, the rationale for not prosecuting Epstein's alleged co-conspirators, and the handling of immigration matters concerning Epstein's assistants. The text reveals internal government discussions about the controversial plea agreement and the legal reasoning behind its terms.
DOJ-OGR-00003266.jpg
This document details the plea negotiations in September 2007 between the USAO (represented by Villafaña, Acosta, and others) and Epstein's defense team. It outlines the drafting of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) proposing a 20-month jail sentence (reducible to 17 months with 'gain time') and notes a critical meeting on September 12 involving the State Attorney's Office to discuss state charges. The text also reveals internal USAO strategy, including preparing a revised indictment in case negotiations failed.
DOJ-OGR-00023142.jpg
This document is page 104 of a DOJ report detailing the organizational structure of the Criminal Division and the Office of the Deputy Attorney General in early 2008. It describes a specific interaction on February 21, 2008, where CEOS Chief Andrew Oosterbaan communicated with defense attorney Lefkowitz, offering to have CEOS take a 'fresh and objective look' at the case rather than partnering directly with the USAO. This conversation occurred shortly after a CEOS Trial Attorney had met with victims.
DOJ-OGR-00023132.jpg
This page from a DOJ OPR report details the delays in Jeffrey Epstein's guilty plea following the signing of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It describes legal maneuvering by Epstein's defense team, including Kenneth Starr calling senior DOJ official Alice Fisher, and disagreements between the USAO and defense regarding the timeline for the plea entry, which was eventually set for January 4, 2008. The document also highlights internal communications regarding Epstein's failure to use 'best efforts' to comply with the NPA timeline.
DOJ-OGR-00008794.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing from December 2021, presents an argument from Ms. Maxwell's defense to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The defense contends that a supplemental jury instruction given by the court was incorrect and prejudicial, citing multiple Second Circuit precedents to argue that confusing or misleading instructions at a critical stage of deliberation can be grounds for reversal. The filing asserts that this error applies to multiple counts and requests a curative instruction.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031798.jpg
An email exchange between 'J' (using the jeevacation@gmail.com address associated with Jeffrey Epstein) and attorney David Schoen regarding a news article about the 2008 plea deal. Schoen criticizes the article's claim that victims were silenced and comments on other lawyers involved, specifically Dershowitz and Lefkowitz. 'J' responds dismissively, stating that 'every outlet needs a sex story.'
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022018.jpg
This text, likely from a memoir or legal account, defends a controversial prosecution decision regarding Jeffrey Epstein. The author argues that the plea deal was the best possible outcome given the evidence and victim reluctance at the time, ensuring jail time and sex offender registration rather than risking a failed trial. The passage also criticizes the defense's tactics, including personal investigations into prosecutors, while acknowledging frustrations with Epstein's treatment in state custody.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010550.jpg
This document is a page from a book, marked as a House Oversight exhibit, written from the perspective of a prosecutor (likely Alexander Acosta) defending the Non-Prosecution Agreement with Jeffrey Epstein. The text argues that the plea deal was necessary due to evidentiary challenges and victim reluctance, while acknowledging that Epstein's lenient treatment in state custody undermined the sentence. It also highlights aggressive defense tactics, including the investigation of prosecutors' private family lives and appeals to Washington, and mentions defense attorneys Lefkowitz and Starr.
No Subject
Discussion about the draft addendum, leading to agreement on its terms.
No Subject
Transmittal email for revised NPA, stated "we have not and don't plan to ask immigration" proceedings to be initiated.
No Subject
Acosta's reply about being happy to talk but wanting [M]arie on the call to avoid undermining staff during negotiations and allowing interlocutory appeals.
Response to allegations of misconduct
Villafaña responded to Lefkowitz's allegations of misconduct, specifically addressing 'false' allegations that the government had made.
Reiterating concerns with § 2255 provision
Lefkowitz sent a second letter to Acosta, asserting the § 2255 provision was 'inherently flawed and becoming truly unmanageable'.
USAO's concern about Epstein's delays
Lefkowitz sent a follow-up letter to Acosta asserting that Epstein was intentionally delaying plea entry and that defense counsel was making efforts to resolve issues.
Non-prosecution language
Villafaña's email continued to include language referring to the four named assistants and unnamed employees.
Addendum Revision
Sloman emailed Lefkowitz a revision to the Addendum language.
Draft Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) details and USAO fl...
Lefkowitz emailed Villafaña about a draft NPA with a 20-month jail sentence and 10 months of community control, questioning USAO flexibility on the § 2255 procedure, contrasting it with 18 months jail and 12 months community control.
N/A
Asking that USAO try to keep the NPA from becoming public.
Addendum revision
Sent a revision to the Addendum language.
Plea Postponement
Request to postpone plea from Oct 26 to Nov 20 due to scheduling conflict.
Unknown
Refusing private 'interlocutory' appeals without staff present.
Revised NPA
Sent revised NPA; stated they don't plan to ask for immigration proceedings.
Plea options
Conveyed two options Lourie suggested: original proposal with 18-month sentence or state charges plus two federal obstruction charges.
Resolving open issues
Reference to a 4:30 call.
Plea negotiations
Lefkowitz attempted to reach Acosta, who then directed Villafaña to return the call.
Revised Draft Victim Notification Letter
Forwarded a revised draft victim notification letter for comment, detailing the completion of the federal investigation and the terms of Epstein's state plea deal.
No Subject
Villafaña’s publicly released emails to Lefkowitz, which drew criticism.
Plea options for Epstein
Villafaña sent a lengthy email to Lefkowitz conveying two plea options suggested by Lourie, involving state and federal charges with different sentence lengths, and also mentioned her willingness to seek approval from Acosta for another federal plea option.
Meeting to resolve outstanding issues
Villafaña offered to have a face-to-face meeting 'off campus' at a 'neutral' location to finalize the NPA negotiations.
Rejection of proposal for Epstein's plea
Lefkowitz questioned Acosta about the rejection of their proposed plea deal for Epstein, outlining the terms and asking why they were not satisfactory.
NPA Addendum Revision
Following a call from Acosta, Sloman emailed a revision of the Addendum language to Lefkowitz.
Request to postpone Epstein's guilty plea
Lefkowitz emailed Acosta seeking to postpone Epstein's guilty plea from October 26, 2007, to November 20, 2007, citing a scheduling conflict.
Agreement to postpone guilty plea
After getting input from Acosta, Sloman emailed Lefkowitz and agreed to the postponement of the guilty plea.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity