Jeffrey Sloman
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Professional subordinate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Unnamed Witness
|
No known relationship |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Professional subordinate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Friend |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed Civil Litigator
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alex Acosta
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Civil Plaintiff Attorney (Unnamed)
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed Witness
|
Does not know |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed Witness
|
No relation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Marie Villafaña
|
Supervisory |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009-09-01 | N/A | Roy Black notifies USAO of Epstein's application to transfer supervision to Virgin Islands. | Miami, Florida | View |
| 2008-06-02 | N/A | Deadline imposed by USAO (Sloman) for Epstein to comply with the Non-Prosecution Agreement. | Miami | View |
| 2008-06-02 | N/A | Deadline set by Jeffrey Sloman for Epstein to comply with the Non-Prosecution Agreement. | Miami | View |
| 2008-05-19 | N/A | Jeffrey Sloman responded to Jay Lefkowitz's email with a letter imposing a deadline. | Miami (USAO) | View |
| 2008-01-01 | N/A | Acosta formally recused from the Epstein matter. | USAO | View |
| 2008-01-01 | N/A | Plea deal negotiation and execution; Epstein pleads guilty to state charges. | Miami / Palm Beach | View |
| 2007-10-30 | Signing of a legal document | The U.S. Attorney's office, via a representative, signed an addendum to a Non-Prosecution Agreeme... | N/A | View |
| 2007-01-01 | N/A | Jeffrey Sloman signed an addendum to the NPA on behalf of the USAO. | USAO | View |
| 2006-07-14 | Meeting | Villafaña met with U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta and Criminal Division Chief Jeffrey Sloman to b... | Miami | View |
| 2006-01-01 | Appointment | Acosta announced the appointments of Sloman as FAUSA and Matthew Menchel as Chief of the USAO’s C... | N/A | View |
| 2006-01-01 | Assumption of office | Acosta was sworn in as U.S. Attorney, and Sloman and Menchel assumed their new offices. | N/A | View |
047.pdf
Legal motion filed on June 25, 2009, by Jeffrey Epstein's defense team (Critton, Pike, Goldberger) in Palm Beach County Circuit Court. Epstein requests a stay on the disclosure of his Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) pending an appellate review, arguing that unsealing the document would cause irreparable harm to privacy rights and innocent third parties. The motion opposes efforts by the Palm Beach Post and a redacted non-party to unseal these court records.
001.pdf
This document is a Notice of Removal filed by defendants Jeffrey Epstein, Sarah Kellen, and Haley Robson, seeking to move a civil lawsuit filed by Jane Doe from the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in Palm Beach County, Florida, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The defendants argue that the non-diverse defendant, Haley Robson, was fraudulently joined solely to defeat diversity jurisdiction and prevent removal. Attached as Exhibit A is a deposition transcript of Jane Doe (whose name is redacted) taken on February 20, 2008, in a related criminal case, where she is questioned about her age, MySpace profiles, inconsistencies in her statements to police regarding sexual contact with Epstein, and her interactions with various attorneys and law enforcement officials.
EFTA00022546.pdf
This document is a Reply Brief filed by victims Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2 in opposition to Jeffrey Epstein's intervention brief regarding remedies for violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The victims argue for the partial rescission of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) signed in 2007, specifically the immunity provisions, on the grounds that the agreement was illegally concealed from victims in violation of the CVRA. The brief refutes Epstein's arguments regarding due process, contract law, estoppel, and separation of powers, asserting that the NPA is unenforceable due to its illegal formation and the government's failure to confer with victims.
EFTA00013858.pdf
A letter dated September 1, 2009, from attorney Roy Black to Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman regarding Jeffrey Epstein. Black informs Sloman that Epstein has completed his incarceration, is serving one year of community control, and is applying to transfer his supervision from Florida to the Virgin Islands (his primary residence) via the ICAOS process. Black emphasizes compliance with the non-prosecution agreement and notes the transfer is pre-approved by the Virgin Islands.
EFTA00013698.pdf
Legal correspondence from Jeffrey Epstein's attorney, Jay Lefkowitz, to prosecutor Jeffrey Sloman regarding the Non-Prosecution Agreement. The letter defends Epstein's agents contacting potential witnesses, confirms the plea and sentencing date of January 4, 2008, and insists on Epstein receiving an 18-month sentence with standard Florida state work release privileges ('equal treatment'). Lefkowitz also raises concerns about the government's handling of victim representation under 18 U.S.C. § 2255.
DOJ-OGR-00021520.jpg
This document is a signature page for an Addendum to Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It certifies that Epstein understands and agrees to comply with clarifications made to the NPA. The document is signed by Epstein's attorney Lilly Ann Sanchez on October 29, 2007, and by a First Assistant U.S. Attorney (FAUSA) on behalf of A. Marie Villafaña on October 30, 2007.
DOJ-OGR-00021518.jpg
This document is a signature page for an addendum to a Non-Prosecution Agreement involving Jeffrey Epstein. It was signed by Jeffrey Epstein on October 29, 2007, and by the U.S. Attorney's office on October 30, 2007. The document certifies that Epstein has read, understood, and agrees to comply with the clarifications in the agreement, and also lists his legal counsel, Gerald Lefcourt and Lilly Ann Sanchez.
DOJ-OGR-00021258.jpg
This document contains a letter dated August 3, 2007, from Matthew Menchel of the U.S. Attorney's Office to Lilly Ann Sanchez, counsel for Mr. Epstein. The letter presents a non-negotiable two-year incarceration plea offer with an August 17 deadline. Accompanying text explains Menchel's rationale for the offer and its firm deadline to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), and notes that the letter was sent on Menchel's last day at the USAO, a timing he described as a 'total coincidence'.
DOJ-OGR-00021218.jpg
This document details the initiation of the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein by the U.S. Attorney's Office in May 2006. AUSA Villafaña opened the case, named "Operation Leap Year," due to federal interests and concerns of improper political influence on the state investigation. On July 14, 2006, Villafaña briefed her superiors, U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta and Criminal Division Chief Jeffrey Sloman, to ensure their support for the high-profile and contentious case.
DOJ-OGR-00023096.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the final days of plea negotiations between the USAO and Jeffrey Epstein's legal team in August 2007. It includes a transcript of a letter signed by Matthew Menchel (on behalf of U.S. Attorney Acosta) setting a non-negotiable two-year incarceration term and an August 17 deadline. The narrative explains that the deadline was set to allow prosecutor Villafaña time to investigate Epstein's assistants and computers in New York if the deal was rejected, and notes that Menchel sent this letter on his final day at the USAO.
DOJ-OGR-00033034.jpg
This is page 46 of a deposition transcript involving an unnamed witness, questioned by Mr. Tein and defended by Mr. Leopold. The witness confirms that attorney Jeffrey Herman was the lawyer who first sued Jeffrey Epstein on their behalf. The questioning turns to whether Herman advanced the witness's family any money, at which point Mr. Leopold objects on the grounds of attorney-client privilege.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019221.jpg
This document is a legal letter dated May 27, 2008, from Kenneth Starr and Joe Whitley to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip, supplementing a request for an independent review of the federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. The letter argues that the prosecution is an unprecedented extension of federal law against a figure with 'close ties to former President Clinton' and complains that Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman imposed an arbitrary June 2 deadline to force compliance with a Non-Prosecution Agreement, thereby attempting to bypass the requested review. The lawyers also allege misconduct, including leaks to the New York Times and conflicts of interest involving Sloman's former law partner filing civil suits against Epstein.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023127.jpg
This document is a clipping of a news article regarding Jeffrey Sloman's defense of the non-prosecution agreement offered to Jeffrey Epstein. Sloman, formerly second-in-command to Alexander Acosta, claims in a Miami Herald opinion piece that the decision was made due to legal impediments and terrified victims, and argues that current criticism of Acosta is politically motivated. The document notes the Justice Department's opening of an investigation into misconduct following the 'Perversion of Justice' series.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025704.jpg
In this confidential letter dated May 27, 2008, attorneys Kenneth Starr and Joe Whitley urge Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip to intervene in the federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. They allege that the U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami, specifically Jeffrey Sloman, imposed an arbitrary deadline for a Non-Prosecution Agreement to prevent an independent DOJ review. The letter highlights Epstein's 'close ties' to former President Clinton and alleges misconduct by the USAO, including leaks to the New York Times and conflicts of interest involving Sloman's former law partner.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012136.jpg
A letter from Kenneth Starr (Kirkland & Ellis) to John Roth (DOJ) dated June 19, 2008, arguing that federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein is unwarranted. Starr outlines four supplemental submissions being sent to the DOJ, which include allegations of misconduct during the federal investigation, a rebuttal to claims by the Miami USAO, and a letter from a former CEOS attorney. The document indicates an aggressive legal defense strategy aimed at preventing federal charges.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016455.jpg
This document serves as a narrative summary of the tense negotiations between the US Attorney's Office (Acosta, Sloman) and Jeffrey Epstein's legal team (Lefkowitz, Starr) around 2008. It details how Epstein's lawyers aggressively pressured the government to prevent victim notification, leading to a secret non-prosecution agreement while the FBI briefly continued investigating in NY and NM. The text notes that in 2013, the government finally admitted they backed down on victim notifications due to objections from Epstein's attorneys.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012434.jpg
This document is a page from a deposition transcript where an unnamed witness is questioned by an attorney, Mr. Tein. The witness denies knowing individuals named Marie Villafona and Jeffrey Sloman but confirms that they know someone named Jeffrey Herman. The questioning also covers a visit by 'two ladies and two guys' to the witness's house and whether any cell phone communication occurred.
Defense of Acosta/Epstein case handling
Alleges attacks on Acosta are politically driven.
RE: Jeffrey Epstein
Notification that Epstein is applying to transfer his community control supervision from Florida to the Virgin Islands via ICAOS.
NPA Deadline
Imposed a deadline of June 2, 2008 to comply with the Non-Prosecution Agreement.
Deadline Imposition
Imposed June 2, 2008 deadline to comply with Non-Prosecution Agreement terms.
Victim Notification
Sloman stated intention to begin notifying Epstein's victims.
Re: Jeffrey Epstein
Response to Sloman's letter of Nov 5, 2007. Discusses NPA compliance, witness contact, plea timing, media, and sentencing terms.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity