| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Acosta
|
Business associate |
22
Very Strong
|
22 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Business associate |
22
Very Strong
|
20 | |
|
person
Lourie
|
Business associate |
19
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
Menchel
|
Business associate |
14
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Professional |
11
Very Strong
|
28 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
37 | |
|
person
Lourie
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
15 | |
|
person
Lefkowitz
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Menchel
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
Lefkowitz
|
Professional adversarial |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Subordinate supervisor |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Oosterbaan
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Adversarial prosecutor defendant |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Sloman
|
Subordinate supervisor |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Reiter
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Edwards
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Prosecutor defendant |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Edwards
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Supervisor subordinate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Menchel
|
Subordinate supervisor |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Alex Acosta
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
OPR
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Black
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Professional adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Sanchez
|
Professional |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008-11-24 | N/A | Villafaña sent a letter to defense attorney Black regarding Epstein's alleged breach of NPA due t... | N/A | View |
| 2008-11-01 | N/A | Villafaña discovers Epstein is on work release at the Florida Science Foundation. | West Palm Beach | View |
| 2008-07-21 | N/A | Villafaña sent a letter to 11 unrepresented victims, providing a copy to Epstein's defense counsel. | N/A | View |
| 2008-07-10 | Communication | Villafaña sent Goldberger a “Final Notification of Identified Victims.” | N/A | View |
| 2008-07-10 | N/A | Government's victim list was finalized. | N/A | View |
| 2008-07-09 | N/A | Villafaña's declaration in the CVRA litigation regarding information from Edwards. | N/A | View |
| 2008-07-09 | Communication | Villafaña began distributing notifications to 32 victims and their counsel. | N/A | View |
| 2008-07-09 | Communication | Villafaña sent a letter to nine victims who had previously retained counsel regarding the NPA and... | N/A | View |
| 2008-07-08 | Communication | Villafaña provided Goldberger with an updated victim list for 18 U.S.C. § 2255 purposes. | N/A | View |
| 2008-07-01 | N/A | Villafaña took steps to facilitate the filing of federal charges if Epstein did not plead guilty. | Unknown | View |
| 2008-07-01 | Legal proceeding | Villafaña took steps to facilitate the filing of federal charges on this date if Epstein did not ... | N/A | View |
| 2008-07-01 | N/A | Planned date to file federal charges if Epstein did not plea by deadline. | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-30 | Legal deadline | Deadline for Epstein to comply with the NPA by entering his guilty plea, being sentenced, and sur... | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-30 | N/A | Villafaña notifies defense counsel that Epstein must comply with NPA by entering guilty plea, bei... | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-30 | Legal deadline | Deadline given to Epstein by Villafaña to comply with the NPA by entering a guilty plea and surre... | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-30 | Court hearing | Epstein entered guilty pleas in Palm Beach County court to charges of solicitation of prostitutio... | Palm Beach County court | View |
| 2008-06-29 | Legal negotiation | Villafaña and Goldberger negotiated changes to Epstein's plea agreement, specifically regarding t... | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-28 | N/A | Villafaña reports back to Sloman about Reiter's intention to notify victims. | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-27 | N/A | Villafaña renews requests to Goldberger and Black for a copy of the state plea agreement. | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-27 | Legal dispute | Villafaña requested the state plea agreement and, upon review, objected to its sentencing provisi... | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-27 | N/A | Villafaña sends letter to Goldberger and Black stating proposed sentencing provision does not com... | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-27 | Communication | Villafaña contacts Reiter and Edwards regarding Epstein's plea. | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-27 | Legal action | Villafaña drafts new version of indictment. | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-27 | Legal negotiation | Villafaña requested the state plea agreement from Epstein's attorneys, received it, and then sent... | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-27 | N/A | Villafaña receives copy of proposed state plea agreement and learns hearing schedule. | N/A | View |
This document discusses the legal proceedings and agreements related to Epstein, detailing how his sentencing was handled and reduced. It highlights Acosta's role in approving the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and references an email exchange between the State Attorney and Villafaña regarding the resolution of the case. The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) concluded that the agreement allowed Epstein to resolve a federal investigation for an 18-month state sentence.
This document excerpt details ongoing plea agreement negotiations on September 19, 2007, between Villafaña and Lefkowitz, with Villafaña setting a firm deadline for conclusion. It also describes Lourie's review of a plea agreement draft and his concerns regarding provisions for suspending investigation and legal process by the USAO.
This document is an excerpt from an OPR report analyzing the conduct of prosecutor Villafaña during the federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. It concludes that Villafaña consistently advocated for Epstein's prosecution and victims' interests, despite a public narrative suggesting collusion with defense counsel. The report details Villafaña's efforts to protect victims' anonymity, expand the case scope, and draft victim notification letters, while refuting claims that she was 'soft on Epstein' based on witness statements and email context.
This document details ethical considerations and actions taken by various individuals involved in the Epstein case, particularly focusing on potential conflicts of interest for USAO staff. It highlights discussions and decisions made by Menchel, Sloman, Lourie, and Acosta regarding their relationships with Epstein's attorneys and their professional responsibilities. The document also mentions Acosta's recusal from the case due to potential employment with Kirkland & Ellis and a separate consultation regarding a possible professorship at Harvard while Dershowitz represented Epstein.
This document discusses the legal defense strategies employed by Jeffrey Epstein's extensive team of attorneys, highlighting their ability to secure concessions despite initial USAO requirements. It details how prominent lawyers like Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr influenced prosecutor Alex Acosta, and addresses assertions from individuals like Menchel, Sloman, and Lourie that their relationships with Epstein's counsel did not affect their actions, while noting the significant financial investment in Epstein's defense.
This document is an excerpt from a report detailing witness challenges and concerns surrounding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. It includes recollections from individuals like Lourie, Menchel, Sloman, and Acosta regarding the viability of a federal prosecution, victim reluctance to testify, evidentiary hurdles, and the eventual negotiated result that led to Epstein serving time and registering as a sexual offender.
This document, an excerpt from a report, discusses OPR's investigation into whether Epstein's status, wealth, or associations improperly influenced the outcome of his case. It concludes that OPR found no evidence of such influence, despite news reports in 2006 identifying Epstein as wealthy and connected to prominent figures like William Clinton, Donald Trump, and Kevin Spacey. The report notes that FBI personnel initially unfamiliar with Epstein later became aware of his connections, including those who had been on his plane, and that his legal team's mention of Clinton in pre-NPA letters was contextual.
This document is an excerpt from a report by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) analyzing former U.S. Attorney Acosta's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. It details OPR's findings that Acosta's decision to approve a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) requiring Epstein to plead guilty to state charges, resulting in an 18-month sentence, did not violate any clear and unambiguous standards or constitute professional misconduct, despite OPR criticizing certain decisions made during the investigation.
This document, an excerpt from an analysis report (Chapter Two, Part Three), discusses the public and media scrutiny following the Miami Herald's November 2018 report on the handling of the Epstein investigation. It focuses on the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), allegations of a 'sweetheart deal' by Acosta and the USAO due to improper influences, and OPR's investigation into these matters, concluding that Acosta reviewed and approved the NPA terms and is accountable for it. The report also mentions other individuals (Menchel, Sloman, Lourie, and Villafaña) involved in the case.
This document details events surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's compliance with his home detention and supervision terms between 2009 and 2010. It highlights his alleged violations, efforts to transfer his supervision to the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the USAO's opposition to these requests, ultimately concluding with Epstein completing his sentence in Florida on July 21, 2010. The text also addresses the veracity of claims about Epstein's cooperation in the Bear Stearns case, which officials in the Eastern District of New York denied.
This document details events in November 2008 concerning Jeffrey Epstein's work release, which USAO official Villafaña believed breached his non-prosecution agreement (NPA). Villafaña communicated her concerns to defense attorney Black and other officials, leading to a notice of NPA violation and the recusal of Acosta from the case. The document highlights the ongoing dispute regarding the terms of Epstein's incarceration and the perceived special treatment he received.
This document details events surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's plea and sentencing from June 2008 to June 2009, including communications between various officials regarding the handling of his case and concerns about the terms of his plea agreement. It highlights discrepancies and objections raised by Villafaña regarding Epstein's proposed custody arrangements, suggesting a potential violation of the agreement's spirit.
This document details the internal review and communications surrounding the resolution of the Epstein case, particularly focusing on the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It highlights disagreements and varying interpretations among legal officials regarding Epstein's claims, the validity of the NPA, and the scope of federal involvement, including a reaction from Villafaña to the proposed 90-day jail term and Deputy Attorney General Filip's perspective on Epstein's arguments.
This document details a March 12, 2008 meeting involving Jeffrey Epstein's defense team (Starr, Lefkowitz, Weinberg) and Department of Justice representatives (Oosterbaan, Mandelker, CEOS Deputy Chief) concerning the Epstein case. It outlines concerns raised by the defense regarding USAO actions, including communication issues with state authorities and a purported relationship between USAO official Sloman and a law firm representing victims. The document also mentions Sloman's prior work in private practice specializing in sexual abuse claims.
This document details the Department's review of the Epstein case from February to June 2008, initiated by Epstein's defense attorneys. It highlights internal discussions and notifications within the US justice system, including a February 28, 2008, notification from USAO Criminal Division Chief Senior to the Civil Rights Division regarding an ongoing child exploitation investigation involving Epstein. The notification, prepared by Villafaña and edited by Sloman, assessed the case as not being of "national interest" and anticipated charges under specific U.S. Code sections.
This document details interactions between Jeffrey Epstein's defense team and the USAO in late 2007, focusing on submissions, a key meeting in Miami on December 14, 2007, and the defense's threat to pursue a Department of Justice review. The discussions revolved around defense complaints, a proposed revised indictment, and a new argument by Epstein's attorneys regarding the applicability of the state charge he agreed to plead guilty to. The document also highlights the USAO's internal review processes and Acosta's communication with Assistant Attorney General Fisher regarding the case.
This document details the efforts of Jeffrey Epstein's defense team in December 2007 to challenge the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and the federal investigation. It describes how defense counsel Starr and Lefkowitz sent letters and 'ethics opinions' to Acosta, criticizing the investigation and accusing an individual named Villafaña of improper conduct and federal overreaching, while Epstein reaffirmed his acceptance of the NPA.
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.
This document details negotiations and communications surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's guilty plea and the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) addendum in late 2007. It highlights disagreements and strategies among prosecutors (Acosta, Sloman, Villafaña, Lourie) and defense counsel (Lefkowitz), including the postponement of Epstein's plea and concerns about Epstein's alleged attempts to discredit victims and influence the legal process. The text also includes Acosta's perspective on not dictating to the state attorney's office.
This document details the finalization and signing of Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) on September 24, 2007. It highlights the edits made by Acosta, including changes to Epstein's plea and sentencing requirements, and communications between various parties like Villafaña, Lourie, and Lefkowitz regarding the agreement's language and confidentiality. The document also notes the USAO's duty to redact protected information before disclosure.
This document details communications and events surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's potential plea deal and sex offender registration in September 2007. It highlights objections from Sanchez and Lefkowitz to the registration requirement, citing a 'misunderstanding' at a prior meeting where prosecutors Krischer and Belohlavek initially stated the offense was not registrable. The document shows efforts by Epstein's defense to avoid registration and secure an 18-month federal camp sentence.
This document details negotiations and internal communications surrounding a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) related to Epstein, focusing on the involvement of Villafaña, Lefkowitz, Acosta, and Lourie. Key points include Villafaña's revised NPA which proposed a 30-month sentence for Epstein and included non-prosecution for co-conspirators, and a dispute with Lourie over the inclusion of an immigration waiver for Epstein's foreign national assistants. The document also touches on the USAO's general stance on immigration issues and the reluctance to charge Epstein's accomplices.
This document excerpt details the breakdown of negotiations for a federal plea agreement for Epstein by September 20, 2007, shifting focus to a state-only resolution to which the defense wanted to avoid sexual offender registration. It describes communications between Villafaña, Lefkowitz, Acosta, Lourie, and Krischer regarding proposed plea terms, sentencing, and deadlines, highlighting Villafaña's firm stance against further delays and Epstein's apparent goal to avoid sexual offender registration.
This document details ongoing negotiations and disagreements surrounding a federal plea agreement for Mr. Epstein in September 2007. It highlights the involvement of Assistant State Attorney Villafaña, who communicated with Belohlavek and sent revised agreements to Lefkowitz, and Acosta, who provided feedback on the USAO's 'hybrid' plea agreement to Lourie, emphasizing the trial team's support is crucial. A key point of contention was the change in offense description from solicitation of minors to forcing adults into prostitution, which made the agreement unacceptable to Villafaña.
This document details the ongoing plea negotiations for Mr. Epstein, highlighting his reluctance for jail time and the communication between prosecutors Lourie and Villafaña, and defense counsel Jay Lefkowitz. It reveals a disagreement over the terms of the plea agreement, with the defense proposing significant changes that were rejected by the USAO, including a prohibition on immigration proceedings against Epstein's female assistants. The document also includes a manager's view that direct conversation with Epstein might be necessary to finalize the deal.
Villafaña's email continued to include language referring to the four named assistants and unnamed employees.
Lourie responded to another issue in a reply email.
Villafaña circulated a draft of the non-prosecution provision, stating it was 'some of [defense counsel's] requested language regarding promises not to prosecute other people,' and commented, 'I don't think it hurts us.'
Requesting their attendance at interviews with victims scheduled for the following day.
Stating they had not heard of Epstein and wanted to ask about him, noting they learned he is 'pretty unsavory'.
Reporting that she spoke with prosecutors from the Bear Stearns case in the Eastern District of New York, who had seen the NY Post article and stated they had never heard of Epstein cooperating with the feds.
Confirming there was 'absolutely no cooperation here or in New York'.
Claiming Epstein had 'specific authorization to walk to work', that the distance was 'less than three miles', and he was in 'total compliance'.
Exchanges reviewed by OPR regarding the Epstein investigation, resolution of the case, and victim notification. Some portions were redacted.
"Please tell me that you are joking. Maybe we should throw him [Epstein] a party and tell him we are sorry to have bothered him."
"Someone really needs to talk to Barry."
Lourie forwarded an email (presumably with Acosta's thoughts/changes) to Villafaña, stating 'I think Alex's changes are all good ones. Please try to incorporate his suggestions, change the signature block to your name and send as final to Jay.'
Villafaña included Acosta directly in emails, but often information traveled through multiple layers.
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.
Discussing plea language, resolving liability, and avoiding highlighting other crimes/persons to the judge.
Informed them that PBPD felt State Attorney succumbed to pressure.
Sent revised NPA; stated they don't plan to ask for immigration proceedings.
Alerted Lourie about 'promises not to prosecute other people' clause; later added defense persistence on immigration waiver.
'No way. We don't put that sort of thing in a plea agreement.'
Notified that Robert Senior would review evidence de novo
Notified Villafaña he told Sanchez a state plea with jail/sex offender status might satisfy U.S. Attorney, but Sanchez called it a 'non-starter'.
Conveyed two options Lourie suggested: original proposal with 18-month sentence or state charges plus two federal obstruction charges.
Explained reasoning for non-prosecution of co-conspirators and immigration stance.
Letter thanking Villafaña at the conclusion of the case.
Villafaña spoke to Edwards but did not inform him specifically of the signed NPA.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity