Sanchez
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Epstein
|
Client |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Menchel
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lourie
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lourie
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Menchel
|
Romantic |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Defense prosecution negotiation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lourie
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Menchel
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Menchel
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lefkowitz
|
Defense team |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Communicated sent letter |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Communicated via letter |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lourie
|
Communicated email |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Matt Menchel
|
Communicated spoke to |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Correspondence |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Meeting | Menchel's Outlook records indicate he scheduled lunch with Sanchez after she left the USAO. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal action | Black took legal action that effectively halted production of computer equipment to the USAO unti... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Communication | Villafaña sent an email to Sanchez proposing a discussion about a federal resolution for Mr. Epst... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Signing of the final Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) | Unknown | View |
| 2008-06-03 | N/A | Sloman sent a lengthy letter to the Deputy Attorney General detailing negotiations with Epstein's... | N/A | View |
| 2008-01-07 | Meeting | Acosta and Sloman met with defense attorney Sanchez, who alleged misconduct by the USAO's media s... | N/A | View |
| 2008-01-07 | Phone call | Acosta and Sloman spoke with Epstein's defense team about a media leak and their desire for a 'wa... | N/A | View |
| 2008-01-07 | N/A | Phone conference following meeting | Phone | View |
| 2008-01-07 | N/A | Defense presents USAO improprieties and 'watered-down' resolution | Unknown | View |
| 2008-01-07 | N/A | Meeting between USAO and Defense Attorney Sanchez | Unknown (likely USAO office) | View |
| 2008-01-01 | N/A | NPA (Non-Prosecution Agreement) negotiation | Unknown | View |
| 2007-12-19 | N/A | Acosta sends letter proposing revised language for NPA Section 2255 regarding victim rights and m... | N/A | View |
| 2007-12-19 | N/A | Acosta sent a letter to Sanchez proposing revised language for the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA... | N/A | View |
| 2007-12-07 | N/A | Villafaña prepares victim letters; Sloman orders them held after request from defense counsel San... | USAO | View |
| 2007-12-07 | N/A | Sloman received a letter from Sanchez regarding Epstein's plea hearing and a request to hold off ... | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-29 | N/A | Epstein and his attorneys, Lefcourt and Sanchez, signed the NPA addendum. | N/A | View |
| 2007-10-29 | Legal agreement | Epstein and his attorneys Lefcourt and Sanchez signed the NPA addendum. Villafaña’s name was prin... | N/A | View |
| 2007-09-22 | Plea negotiations | Epstein's defense counsel (Sanchez, Lefkowitz) engaged in intense communication with prosecutors ... | N/A | View |
| 2007-09-21 | Legal negotiation / communication | Epstein attorney Sanchez emailed Sloman to finalize a plea deal, which Sloman then forwarded to A... | N/A | View |
| 2007-09-21 | Plea negotiations | A series of communications occurred between the prosecution (Acosta, Villafaña, Lourie) and defen... | N/A | View |
| 2007-09-12 | N/A | Meeting where 'miscommunication' occurred regarding registrability of solicitation of a minor | N/A | View |
| 2007-09-07 | Meeting | A meeting was held for Epstein's defense team to argue against federal prosecution. Starr focused... | USAO’s West Palm Beach office | View |
| 2007-09-07 | N/A | Meeting: Defense presents counteroffer | Unknown | View |
| 2007-09-07 | N/A | Defense presents counteroffer | Unknown | View |
| 2007-09-07 | Meeting | A meeting where the defense team presented their federalism arguments. Acosta intended it to be f... | N/A | View |
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-00021279.jpg
This legal document details plea negotiations in the case against Mr. Epstein on and around September 21, 2007. It reveals intense back-and-forth communication between prosecutors (Acosta, Villafaña, Lourie) and defense attorneys (Lefkowitz, Sanchez) over critical terms, including whether Epstein would have to register as a sex offender and the scope of a non-prosecution agreement for his alleged co-conspirators. The document highlights internal prosecution strategies and their dismissive view of some members of Epstein's legal team.
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-00021260.jpg
This legal document details communications among prosecutors Acosta, Villafaña, and Lourie in August 2007 regarding the Epstein investigation. The prosecutors debated strategy concerning defense counsel's efforts to delay litigation and prevent the government from obtaining computer evidence. Ultimately, Acosta decided to meet with the defense, postponing investigative steps and deadlines, believing it was better to keep the matter within the USAO rather than letting it escalate to the main Department of Justice.
DOJ-OGR-00021254.jpg
This legal document describes a meeting on July 31, 2007, between the USAO and Jeffrey Epstein's defense team to discuss a plea deal. The USAO presented a proposal that included a federal sentencing range of 188 to 235 months, while Epstein's attorneys argued for alternatives like home confinement, citing safety concerns in prison. Prosecutor Villafaña later expressed concerns to the OPR that the defense team could 'manipulate' a state-level sentence and that the USAO would be 'giving up all control.'
DOJ-OGR-00021247.jpg
This document excerpt details the defense's ongoing efforts in July 2007 to halt a federal investigation into Epstein and prevent the government from obtaining computer equipment, including sending letters to the USAO. Concurrently, CEOS endorsed Villafaña's legal analysis and proposed charges, with CEOS Chief Oosterbaan finding the defense's arguments unpersuasive and offering CEOS's assistance for the prosecution. The document also references a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and the removal of computer equipment from Epstein's home.
DOJ-OGR-00021245.jpg
This legal document details internal conflict within the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding the prosecution of Epstein. It describes prosecutor Villafaña's unsuccessful attempt to meet with her superior, Acosta, a contentious email exchange with her colleague Menchel that was later reviewed by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), and her efforts to obtain computer evidence from Epstein's home. The document highlights disagreements on strategy and procedure among the prosecutors handling the case.
DOJ-OGR-00021242.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing that quotes a lengthy email from an individual named Menchel to a recipient identified in a footnote as Sloman. In the email, Menchel severely criticizes Sloman for acting without authorization in the investigation of Mr. Epstein, specifically for preparing an indictment memo and misleading agents. Menchel also clarifies that his own conversation with Lilly Sanchez about the case was an informal exploratory discussion, not a formal plea offer, and was conducted with the full knowledge of the US Attorney.
DOJ-OGR-00021240.jpg
This legal document details a disagreement between prosecutors Menchel and Villafaña in July 2007 regarding a proposed state plea deal to resolve a federal investigation into Epstein. Menchel, asserting the decision was ultimately made by Alex Acosta, defended the state plea, while Villafaña argued it was contrary to Department of Justice policy, did not reflect the gravity of the offense, and went against the wishes of victims she had consulted.
DOJ-OGR-00021237.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the internal conflicts and decision-making process regarding Jeffrey Epstein's plea deal in mid-2007. It highlights prosecutor Villafaña's concerns about unauthorized communications between her superiors (Menchel/Lourie) and Epstein's defense team, specifically regarding a state-based plea deal. The text outlines U.S. Attorney Acosta's reasoning for pursuing a state resolution rather than federal charges, citing concerns about victim testimony and legal issues, despite believing the victims' accounts. Footnotes clarify the specifics of the Ashcroft Memo and disputes between Acosta and Sloman regarding who was involved in the decision-making.
DOJ-OGR-00021236.jpg
This document is a page from an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report analyzing the decision to resolve a federal investigation against Epstein with a state plea deal. It details the rationale behind the decision, citing concerns about the case's viability and state jurisdiction, and specifically recounts communications from June and July 2007 between the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) and Epstein's defense team regarding the proposed state resolution.
DOJ-OGR-00021235.jpg
This legal document details internal discussions and a key meeting related to the federal investigation of Epstein. It describes a June 26, 2007, meeting where Epstein's attorneys, led by Dershowitz, argued for the case to be handled by the state, an argument the USAO team found unpersuasive. Despite internal concerns about the strength of certain aspects of the case, the USAO team left the meeting intending to proceed, but the document concludes by noting that in July 2007, Acosta decided to offer Epstein a two-year state plea deal to resolve the federal investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00021233.jpg
This page from an OPR report details internal conflicts within the USAO in June 2007 regarding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. Prosecutor Villafaña urged speed, believing Epstein was still offending, while supervisors Menchel and Lourie preferred to engage with defense counsel, believing Epstein was 'under a microscope' and unlikely to re-offend. The document details the supplementation of the prosecution memo with information on a new Jane Doe and a specific victim who had sexual contact with both Epstein and an assistant, as well as the logistics of setting up a meeting with defense counsel Sanchez.
DOJ-OGR-00021231.jpg
This document is a page from an OPR report detailing internal DOJ deliberations in May 2007 regarding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. It highlights a conflict between prosecutors Lourie (who favored meeting with defense) and Villafaña (who strongly opposed it, arguing the case warranted prison time rather than probation negotiations). The text includes details of emails and a draft memo where Villafaña expresses concern that meeting with Epstein's lawyers, including Lefcourt and Dershowitz, would reveal too much prosecution strategy.
DOJ-OGR-00021225.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the internal deliberations regarding the federal indictment of Jeffrey Epstein in 2007. It describes AUSA Villafaña's 82-page prosecution memorandum dated May 1, 2007, which recommended a 60-count indictment, and the subsequent strategic disagreement by supervisor Lourie, who preferred a narrower strategy focusing on victims with fewer credibility issues. The text also highlights the unusual involvement of the Miami 'front office' in approval decisions typically handled by the West Palm Beach office.
DOJ-OGR-00021224.jpg
This document details internal DOJ conflicts and meetings with Jeffrey Epstein's defense team in early 2007. Prosecutor Villafaña disagreed with her supervisor, Lourie, about meeting defense attorneys Sanchez and Lefcourt, arguing it would reveal government strategy without gaining concessions. On February 1, 2007, the defense presented a 25-page letter attacking victim credibility, denying federal jurisdiction, and claiming violations of the Petite policy.
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-00010434.jpg
This document is page 17 of a defense sentencing memorandum filed on June 15, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues against the application of sentencing guideline § 4B1.5 ('Repeat and Dangerous' sex offenders), asserting that Maxwell has not committed crimes in nearly 20 years, is not attracted to minors, and acted only as a facilitator for Epstein's impulses rather than having them herself. The text contrasts her behavior with case law examples of violent repeat offenders and highlights her subsequent crime-free life involved with partners who had children.
DOJ-OGR-00010421.jpg
This document is page 4 of a 29-page legal filing (Document 662) in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on June 15, 2022. It is a table of authorities listing various court cases, statutes such as the 'Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act of 1998', and other sources like the Merriam-Webster dictionary and United States Sentencing Guidelines. The page numbers where these authorities are cited within the main document are also provided.
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-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-00003281.jpg
This document, part of a legal case filed in 2021, details communications and negotiations from September 2007 concerning a potential plea deal for Mr. Epstein. It highlights discussions among various legal professionals regarding charges, sexual offender registration, and the scope of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). A key aspect is the USAO's agreement, as part of a draft NPA, not to criminally charge Epstein's female assistants, employees of his corporate entity, and 'potential co-conspirators' in an ongoing federal investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00003262.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing internal conflicts within the USAO in August 2007 regarding the Epstein investigation. Prosecutor Marie Villafaña urged for continued investigation, specifically a trip to New York to interview employees and efforts to seize Epstein's computers, citing a recent interview with a victim recruited at age 14. However, US Attorney Alexander Acosta prioritized maintaining control of the case over DOJ intervention, leading to delays in investigative steps and a stay in litigation to accommodate meetings with Epstein's defense team.
DOJ-OGR-00003257.jpg
This document details the plea negotiations between Jeffrey Epstein's defense team and the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) in early August 2007. On August 2, Epstein's lawyer, Sanchez, proposed a sentence of home confinement and restitution, arguing a state prison sentence was unacceptable. The following day, the USAO, through a letter drafted by Villafaña, rejected this offer and countered that a two-year term of imprisonment was the minimum acceptable sentence to resolve the federal investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00003248.jpg
This document details prosecutor Villafaña's efforts during the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein to obtain computer equipment removed from his Palm Beach residence. Believing the equipment contained crucial evidence like surveillance video, Villafaña made formal requests to Epstein's defense counsel, consulted with other Department of Justice sections, and communicated with defense representatives who delayed and ultimately failed to comply with the request.
Allegations of USAO Misconduct
Sanchez met with Acosta and Sloman, alleging a USAO spokesperson leaked case details and suggested a 'watered-down resolution' to avoid 'ugliness in DC'. The meeting ended when Acosta left and Sloman refused to continue without a witness.
Allegations of USAO Misconduct
Sanchez met with Acosta and Sloman, alleging a USAO spokesperson leaked case details and suggested a 'watered-down resolution' to avoid 'ugliness in DC'. The meeting ended when Acosta left and Sloman refused to continue without a witness.
NPA § 2255 Language
Proposal to resolve disagreements over interpretation of the NPA relating to victim restitution/rights.
Epstein matter
Letter submitted with Sloman's June 3, 2008 letter.
Unknown (referenced in text)
Included in submission materials.
Clarification of damages provision
A letter from Acosta to Epstein's defense attorney Sanchez clarifying the damages provision, language from which was later used by Villafaña.
Proposal to resolve disagreements over NPA interpretation
Acosta sent a letter to Sanchez proposing to resolve disagreements by replacing existing NPA language.
Addendum proposal
Acosta represented that he had proposed the addendum at the breakfast meeting.
Unknown
Advising of Jan 4 plea hearing and requesting USAO 'hold off' sending victim letters.
Epstein plea hearing and victim notification
Sanchez advised Sloman of Epstein's plea hearing date (Jan 4, 2008) and requested the USAO 'hold off' sending victim notification letters until further discussion.
Attorney representative's role
Asked Sloman to help resolve issues regarding the attorney representative's role.
Lefcourt's phone number
Sanchez sent Lefcourt's phone number to Lourie.
Epstein's plea and registration requirement
Sanchez sent a series of emails to Lourie, strongly objecting to the sexual offender registration requirement for Epstein, claiming it was based on a miscommunication.
Epstein case resolution not reasonable
Sanchez wrote again stating the resolution in the Epstein case was not reasonable, calling it a misunderstanding. She stated Epstein's attorneys emphasized an 18-month federal camp goal, and a registrable offense precluded a camp designation, which was inconsistent with Epstein's safety concerns. She concluded that imposing a 'life sentence' (registration) is not something to be proud of and asked for reconsideration.
Details from press report, request to call Menchel
Sanchez provided details from a press report about a Florida public official who pled guilty to child sex abuse charges and was sentenced to probation. She noted she spoke to Matt Menchel and asked Lourie to call her.
Objection to registration requirement
Sanchez sent a lengthy email strongly objecting to the registration requirement for Epstein, claiming a 'miscommunication' at the September 12, 2007 meeting where Krischer and Belohlavek confirmed solicitation with minors was NOT registrable. She argued against registration due to lack of prior record, no danger of recidivism, ease of tracking, and difficulty complying with state requirements.
Finalizing plea deal
Sanchez emailed Sloman stating a desire to finalize the plea deal, claiming only one issue was outstanding.
Finalizing plea deal
Sanchez advised Sloman that he wanted to finalize the plea deal, noting one outstanding issue and believing that Alex had not read all defense submissions.
Request for stay of litigation
Sanchez reached out to Lourie and obtained his agreement for a joint request to stay litigation until after Acosta's meeting with defense counsel.
Joint Request for Stay
Obtained agreement to a joint request for a stay until after Acosta's meeting.
Plea proposal for Jeffrey Epstein
Sanchez, on behalf of Epstein's defense team, sent a letter proposing a sentence of two years home confinement, restitution, and other conditions, arguing it would vindicate the federal interest without requiring a state prison sentence.
Request for extension
Sanchez emailed Villafaña requesting a two-week extension for the production of computer equipment, hoping for a 'state-based resolution'.
Breakfast meeting and Addendum proposal
Acosta stated he had “sua sponte proposed the Addendum to Mr. Lefkowitz at an October meeting in Palm Beach.”
Request for meeting
Sanchez contacted Villafaña to schedule a meeting, but Villafaña responded that she wanted documents first.
Breakfast meeting and Addendum proposal
Acosta stated he had 'sua sponte proposed the Addendum to Mr. Lefkowitz at an October meeting in Palm Beach' to avoid a 'litigious selection process.'
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity