An email exchange between personnel at the US Attorney's Office (USAFLS) dated June 30, 2008. An Assistant U.S. Attorney reports informing attorney Ted Leopold about the news regarding Jeffrey Epstein (likely the plea deal/jail sentence). Leopold indicated he represented three victims and was happy with the news. A colleague replies with congratulations on the case, referring to Epstein as a 'filthy rich bad guy going to jail' due to their dedication.
Internal email from an Assistant U.S. Attorney (Ccing Alex Acosta) discussing a victims' lawyer's request to void Epstein's plea deal due to additional victims. The AUSA confirms they are bound by the agreement. The email also details a meeting with the Sheriff's Office where it was revealed Epstein's legal team (Goldberger, Starr) threatened to sue over unfavorable treatment, and that Epstein would be granted work release despite prior contradictions.
An email chain between Assistant U.S. Attorneys discussing the filing of Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement. The correspondence highlights significant 'misstatements' made by Epstein during his change of plea, specifically regarding the 'Florida Science Foundation' (FSF). The emails reveal that the FSF was incorporated much later than Epstein claimed, operated out of Jack Goldberger's law office without signage or staff knowledge, and that Epstein could not have worked there daily as he claimed.
This document is an email thread from July 30, 2008, involving Assistant U.S. Attorneys (USAFLS) and attorney Roy Black. The AUSA initially contacted Black to discuss the 'Epstein matter,' to which Black replied he was out of town and asked for details. The AUSA then forwarded this exchange internally, suggesting the discussion relates to the 'performance of the Non-Prosecution Agreement'.
This document is an email chain dated July 30, 2008, between an Assistant U.S. Attorney (USAFLS) and Roy Black, Jeffrey Epstein's attorney. The correspondence concerns scheduling a phone call to discuss the 'performance of the criminal Non-Prosecution Agreement' related to Epstein. Roy Black indicates he is traveling in California during the exchange.
This email exchange from September 17, 2008, between attorney Katherine Ezell and an Assistant U.S. Attorney (USAFLS) discusses the transfer of sensitive documents related to the Epstein case. The AUSA provides a draft letter to the Florida Bar, the Non-Prosecution Agreement, and confirms that a Special Agent is FedExing unredacted documents. The thread also references a 'Victim Notification Log' and an upcoming meeting with victims scheduled for that Friday, as well as a lack of communication from Epstein's defense attorney Roy Black.
This document is an internal email chain within the U.S. Attorney's Office dated September 19, 2008. Michele Dargan, a reporter for the Palm Beach Daily News, contacted the office asking why they decided not to prosecute Jeffrey Epstein federally despite the plea agreement terms. The internal response reveals that the Assistant U.S. Attorney on the case refused to speak to the reporter, and the press officer ultimately gave a 'no comment' response.
An internal email from an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of Florida (USAFLS) dated October 16, 2008. The subject is 'Immunity' and it contains attachments related to a response to quash subpoenas and a surreply, likely pertaining to legal proceedings involving Epstein's immunity deal.
An email dated August 21, 2008, from an Assistant U.S. Attorney (USAFLS) to attorneys Roy Black and Jay Lefkowitz. The email attaches a response to a previous letter from Lefkowitz and a Protective Order received in the 'Jane Doe v. United States' litigation. The document originates from the West Palm Beach U.S. Attorney's office.
This document is an email thread from July 2008 forwarding previous correspondence from November 2007. An Assistant U.S. Attorney (name redacted) forwards a 'Victim Notification Letter' to Alex Acosta, noting that this letter—originally sent to defense attorney Jay Lefkowitz—was 'objected to by the defense' and is being referenced in a draft declaration. The document highlights the legal friction regarding victim notification procedures in the Epstein case.
This document is an email chain from June 3, 2008, between staff at the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (SDFL). The correspondence concerns the transmission of a letter regarding Jeffrey Epstein ('Epstein ltr Ofc of DAG 06 03 08.pdf'), likely directed to or concerning the Office of the Deputy Attorney General. The participants discuss sending a hard copy of the document 'with fancy tabs' via FedEx.
An email from an Assistant U.S. Attorney dated July 1, 2008, regarding the filing of the Non-Prosecution Agreement in the Epstein case. The prosecutor highlights that Epstein made 'misstatements' to the court regarding his employment at the 'Florida Science Foundation,' noting that the entity was only recently incorporated, operated out of attorney Jack Goldberger's office with no physical presence, and that Epstein had not been in the county to work there 'every day' as claimed. The prosecutor leaves it to the recipient's discretion whether to inform the Court of these lies.
An email dated June 3, 2008, from an Assistant U.S. Attorney in West Palm Beach to a colleague. The email discusses a potential conflict of interest or media strategy, noting that Jeffrey Epstein's publicist, Howard Rubenstein, also represents The New York Post, which had recently published an article quoting Epstein's lawyer, Lefcourt.
An email dated June 27, 2008, from an unnamed Assistant U.S. Attorney in West Palm Beach to attorneys Jack Goldberger and Roy Black. The email serves as a cover letter for an attached 'Notice of Non-Compliance' (file: 080627_Goldberger_Black_notification_ltr.pdf). The sender's contact details and email addresses are redacted.
This document contains an email chain between officials at the U.S. Attorney's Office dated October 29, 2008. An Assistant U.S. Attorney in West Palm Beach inquires about how to handle a letter requesting the 'entire file' on Epstein, noting the letter did not reference FOIA. The responder advises construing the request as a FOIA request and mentions a delay in their own correspondence due to military leave.
This document is an email from an Assistant U.S. Attorney dated February 1, 2008, discussing a development in the civil lawsuits against Jeffrey Epstein. The email reports that the mother of a minor victim ('[Redacted]') has filed a motion to intervene and stay the proceedings until the victim turns 18, claiming the victim has been estranged from her father (who presumably filed the suit) since Thanksgiving and did not consent to the lawsuit.
An email from an Assistant U.S. Attorney to Alex Acosta and another colleague describing the emotional toll on victims interviewed regarding the Epstein case. The sender details specific reactions from two victims, including one suffering nightmares and another rejecting financial restitution in favor of a longer jail sentence than the reported 18-month plea deal. The sender urges Acosta to intervene or attend future interviews, stating the victims deserve better than they have received.
This document contains an email chain between late 2007 involving Federal Prosecutors (US Attorney's Office) and State Prosecutors (Palm Beach County ASA) regarding the 'Epstein settlement agreement.' The correspondence highlights the coordination between state and federal offices to ensure Jeffrey Epstein's state plea and sentencing occurred before January 4, 2008, specifically to satisfy the terms of a federal non-prosecution agreement. The emails reveal logistical challenges with Judge McSorley's scheduling preferences but confirm that the settlement was a 'definite go.'
An email exchange dated December 7, 2007, between an Assistant U.S. Attorney in West Palm Beach and a superior. The AUSA asks for permission to send out victim notification letters and to copy Mr. Josefsberg (likely Epstein's defense attorney) on them. The superior responds from a BlackBerry with a direct order to 'Hold the letter,' indicating a delay or intervention in the notification process.
An email dated September 11, 2007, from an Assistant U.S. Attorney (USAFLS) to Gerald Lefcourt regarding a 'Revised Agreement re Epstein'. The sender attaches the '070911_Epstein_Non-Prosecution_Agreement.pdf' and notes that the revision was requested by Mr. Acosta but the operative terms remain unchanged.
An email dated December 10, 2007, from an Assistant U.S. Attorney (USAFLS) to Lanna Belohlavek. The subject is Jeffrey Epstein. The sender apologizes for a delay and informs Lanna that a redacted individual will confer with her regarding facts she requested.
This document is an email chain from December 2007 involving Assistant U.S. Attorneys in West Palm Beach discussing the finalization of paperwork for Jeffrey Epstein's plea conference. The correspondents discuss drafting a factual basis for the 'procuring statute' that is 'short and sweet with no names,' with a date set for December 21. One prosecutor expresses frustration, stating they find the situation regarding information requests 'very demoralizing.'
An email chain from June 30, 2008, involving Alex Acosta and redacted Assistant U.S. Attorneys. The emails discuss Jeffrey Epstein pleading guilty in state court. An unidentified sender congratulates the AUSA on an 'exceptional' result that will 'serve the victims well,' while Acosta asks for the correspondence to be placed in the 'Epstein binder.'
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity