Jay Lefkowitz
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Client |
25
Very Strong
|
23 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
17
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Client |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Alex Acosta
|
Legal representative |
6
|
6 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Acquaintance |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Marie Villafaña
|
Negotiating parties |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alexandra Wolfe
|
Professional media relations |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
AUSA Villafaña
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Kenneth Starr
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
USAO team members
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ann Marie C. Villafana
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lourie
|
Adversarial professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Adversarial professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Negotiation counterparts |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
AUSA Villafaña
|
Opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Marie Villafaña
|
Professional adversarial negotiation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Opposing counsel negotiating |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Villafaña
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Plea negotiation | Negotiations for a plea agreement for Mr. Epstein were underway, with a deadline set for the foll... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Lourie and Lefkowitz reach an agreement on plea terms. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Private meeting between Acosta and Lefkowitz at a Marriott hotel in West Palm Beach regarding kee... | Marriott hotel, West Palm B... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Negotiations for Mr. Epstein's plea agreement. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal decision | The USAO rejected the new plea agreement proposal from the defense. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal action | Defense counsel Jay Lefkowitz submitted a revised draft plea agreement that substantially changed... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Plea negotiation | Lourie and Lefkowitz spoke and reached a verbal agreement on a plea deal. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deadline for signing an agreement regarding Mr. Epstein's plea. | N/A | View |
| 2025-11-19 | N/A | Breakfast meeting | N/A | View |
| 2025-10-01 | N/A | Meeting between Alexander Acosta and Jay Lefkowitz to finalize the Epstein non-prosecution agreem... | West Palm Beach Marriott on... | View |
| 2018-12-28 | N/A | SORA (Sex Offender Registration Act) hearing | New York (Implied) | View |
| 2011-03-07 | N/A | Attorney Jay Lefkowitz contacts Alexandra Wolfe regarding her inquiries about Jeffrey Epstein. | N/A | View |
| 2011-01-18 | N/A | SORA (Sex Offender Registration Act) Hearing to determine Epstein's risk level. | New York Supreme Court, Par... | View |
| 2008-11-24 | N/A | Proposed meeting between Jay Lefkowitz and Assistant U.S. Attorney (Monday before Thanksgiving). | West Palm Beach (implied) | View |
| 2008-11-24 | N/A | Jay Lefkowitz trip to see Jeffrey Epstein. | Unknown | View |
| 2008-06-23 | N/A | DOJ official sends a letter regarding the Epstein matter to Epstein's legal team (Starr, Lefkowit... | N/A | View |
| 2008-06-20 | N/A | Submission of defense materials by Kenneth Starr and Jay Lefkowitz to the DOJ (John Roth) regardi... | Email correspondence | View |
| 2008-05-19 | N/A | Jay Lefkowitz requests a meeting with Alex [Acosta]. | Unspecified | View |
| 2008-05-19 | N/A | Jeffrey Sloman responded to Jay Lefkowitz's email with a letter imposing a deadline. | Miami (USAO) | View |
| 2008-01-30 | N/A | Email correspondence regarding a new civil lawsuit against Epstein. | View | |
| 2008-01-04 | N/A | Proposed date for Epstein's plea and sentencing hearing. | Court | View |
| 2007-12-19 | N/A | Phone conversation between prosecution (Acosta, Sloman) and defense (Starr, Lefkowitz). | Phone | View |
| 2007-11-28 | N/A | Victim notification letter sent to Jay Lefkowitz. | West Palm Beach, FL (Sender... | View |
| 2007-11-21 | N/A | Meeting between USAFLS and Epstein defense team. | Unknown | View |
| 2007-11-21 | N/A | Meeting regarding Judge Davis's selection of Podhurst and Josephsberg. | Unknown | View |
DOJ-OGR-00023189.tif
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.
DOJ-OGR-00023111.tif
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.
DOJ-OGR-00000507.jpg
An email from Assistant U.S. Attorney Ann Marie Villafana to Jay Lefkowitz dated September 18, 2007, discussing the distinction between plea agreements and non-prosecution agreements (NPA) and their public accessibility. The email also details potential obstruction charges, specifically mentioning an incident where Epstein's private investigators forced a victim's father off the road, and the need to interview a female witness to confirm facts for a proffer.
DOJ-OGR-00000505.jpg
This document is an email thread from September 13, 2007, between Assistant U.S. Attorney Ann Marie Villafana and attorney Jay Lefkowitz. They arrange a phone call for the following morning to discuss potential misdemeanor charges under specific U.S. legal codes related to an incident on an airplane. The discussion indicates they are negotiating a potential plea agreement, with Villafana seeking to confirm the factual basis for the plea.
DOJ-OGR-00000368.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a SORA (Sex Offender Registration Act) hearing for Jeffrey Epstein filed on July 15, 2019. Defense attorneys Jay Lefkowitz and Sandra Musumeci appear for Epstein, who is not present, while Jennifer Gaffney appears for the People. The discussion centers on a 'Level Three' recommendation from the board and the prosecution's hesitation to rely on the Florida probable cause affidavit because Florida only pursued one case despite multiple victims listed.
DOJ-OGR-00021384.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a DOJ OPR report analyzing the handling of the Epstein case by the US Attorney's Office. It details a significant communication breakdown between US Attorney Alexander Acosta and AUSA Marie Villafaña regarding the signing of Epstein's 2007 plea agreement (NPA), where Villafaña felt forced to sign a deal she opposed while Acosta claimed he intended to give her veto power. It also highlights how senior management (Menchel) blocked Villafaña from meeting directly with Acosta, resulting in final decisions being made without input from the prosecutor most familiar with the facts.
DOJ-OGR-00021381.jpg
This page from a DOJ OPR report critiques the plea negotiations between the USAO (led by Acosta) and Jeffrey Epstein's defense. It highlights that the 18-month sentence was a reduction from an initial 'non-negotiable' 2-year offer, a decision for which OPR could find no documented justification or legal basis. The report concludes that Acosta viewed the federal case merely as a 'backstop' to state charges, failing to seek a punishment that matched the severity of Epstein's crimes.
DOJ-OGR-00021359.jpg
This page from a DOJ OPR report concludes that the frequency of meetings between USAO officials (Acosta, Menchel, Lourie, Sloman, Villafaña) and Epstein's defense team (Starr, Lefkowitz) was not evidence of improper favoritism, given the high-profile nature of the case and the resources of the defendant. It details specific meetings in late 2007 and early 2008, noting that despite defense efforts to involve higher-level DOJ officials (Fisher, Filip), the USAO maintained its position on the federal investigation and the NPA. The report ultimately finds no evidence that these meetings resulted in substantial improper benefits to the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00021352.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report analyzing potential conflicts of interest within the USAO regarding the Epstein case. It details interviews with officials Menchel, Sloman, Lourie, and Acosta, concluding that personal relationships with defense attorneys did not improperly influence the case. The text highlights Acosta's eventual recusal in late 2008 due to employment talks with Kirkland & Ellis, and a separate inquiry regarding his potential role at Harvard Law School given Alan Dershowitz's involvement.
DOJ-OGR-00021351.jpg
This legal document discusses the effectiveness of Jeffrey Epstein's high-profile legal team, including Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr, in portraying his case as legally complex to prosecutors like Alex Acosta. It also examines whether preexisting relationships between prosecutors (Menchel, Sloman, Lourie, and Acosta) and defense counsel improperly influenced the outcome, concluding, based on an OPR investigation, that they did not. The document highlights how Epstein's wealth funded a formidable defense that successfully negotiated concessions from the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO).
DOJ-OGR-00021344.jpg
This document is a page from a Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report reviewing the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. It details the timeline of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) negotiations, specifically noting that key decisions were made before US Attorney Acosta met with defense counsel Lefkowitz. The report cites prosecutor Villafaña's explanation that the decision to pursue an NPA was driven by evidentiary risks and victim privacy concerns.
DOJ-OGR-00021300.jpg
This document outlines the negotiations between US Attorney Alexander Acosta and Jeffrey Epstein's defense team (including Ken Starr and Jay Lefkowitz) regarding the language of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), specifically Section 2255 concerning victim rights and monetary damages. On December 19, 2007, Acosta proposed revised language to clarify victim rights as if Epstein had been convicted federally, but the defense rejected this, arguing it was legally incongruous to fit a civil statute into a criminal plea. The document highlights the mounting frustration of the prosecution regarding what they perceived as intentional delays by the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00021299.jpg
This document details the tense negotiations between the USAO (Acosta) and Epstein's defense team (Starr, Lefkowitz, Dershowitz) in December 2007. Following defense submissions, the USAO initiated a de novo review of evidence by Criminal Chief Robert Senior and held a meeting in Miami on December 14, 2007, where the defense argued state charges did not apply. The defense subsequently threatened to seek review from DOJ Washington (AAG Fisher), prompting Acosta to request an expedited review to preserve a scheduled January 4th plea date.
DOJ-OGR-00021297.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a DOJ OPR report detailing the friction between US Attorney Alexander Acosta and Jeffrey Epstein's defense team (specifically Ken Starr and Jay Lefkowitz) regarding the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). Acosta expresses frustration with the defense's 'collateral challenges' and lack of finality, setting a strict deadline of December 7, 2007, for them to commit to the agreement or face trial. The text highlights Acosta's internal justification to OPR regarding his handling of the breach of agreement risks and the involvement of DOJ Headquarters.
DOJ-OGR-00021291.jpg
This document details the tense negotiations in October 2007 between the U.S. Attorney's Office (Acosta, Sloman, Villafaña) and Epstein's defense (Lefkowitz) regarding the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) addendum and the postponement of Epstein's guilty plea. The text highlights USAO suspicions that Epstein's team was delaying the plea to address a civil lawsuit filed by a victim in New York and alleges Epstein planted false press stories to discredit victims. Acosta agreed to move the plea date from October 26 to November 20, 2007, citing a desire not to dictate schedules to the State Attorney.
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-00021277.jpg
This document outlines the internal and external communications of the US Attorney's Office regarding Jeffrey Epstein's plea negotiations on September 20, 2007. It details U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta's refusal to sign the plea agreement personally, insisting the trial team sign it, and his refusal to alter standard charging language. The text also highlights a critical dispute where Epstein's defense attempted to change the charge from solicitation of minors (registrable) to forcing adults into prostitution (non-registrable), which the prosecution rejected.
DOJ-OGR-00021276.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a report (likely OPR) detailing internal communications on September 19, 2007, between prosecutors Villafaña, Lourie, and U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta regarding plea negotiations with Jeffrey Epstein's lawyer, Jay Lefkowitz. While Villafaña and Lourie strongly recommended ending negotiations due to what they perceived as the defense's "bad faith" tactics of re-inserting rejected provisions, Acosta instructed them to continue trying to "work it out" rather than indict immediately. The page ends mid-sentence with Villafaña expressing concern about "caving" to the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00021273.jpg
This legal document details a critical point in plea negotiations for Mr. Epstein. After prosecutor Lourie believed he had reached an agreement with defense counsel Jay Lefkowitz, Lefkowitz submitted a revised proposal with substantially different terms, including a shorter sentence and protections for Epstein's assistants. This new proposal caused frustration among the prosecutors and was ultimately rejected by the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO).
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-00021268.jpg
This legal document details plea negotiations in September 2007 between prosecutor Villafaña and Jeffrey Epstein's attorney, Jay Lefkowitz. It outlines the development of a 'hybrid' plea agreement involving federal and state charges, a proposed 18-month sentence, and a victim's fund. The document also reveals significant internal dissent among Villafaña's colleagues, particularly Lourie and Acosta, who criticized a proposed assault charge as weak and suggested finding an alternative.
DOJ-OGR-00021266.jpg
This page from a DOJ OPR report details the internal confusion and negotiations regarding Jeffrey Epstein's plea deal in September 2007. It highlights the lack of clarity on why Epstein's sentence was reduced from 24 to 18 months, with Assistant U.S. Attorney Villafaña admitting the reduction happened 'somehow' during the 'flip flop' between state and federal charges. The document also documents Acosta's delegation of negotiation authority and communications between the USAO and Epstein's lawyer, Jay Lefkowitz.
DOJ-OGR-00021259.jpg
This document details events from August-September 2007 in the Jeffrey Epstein case, focusing on U.S. Attorney Acosta's decision to meet with Epstein's newly hired, high-profile attorneys, Kenneth Starr and Jay Lefkowitz. It reveals internal tensions, with the FBI pushing for federal prosecution, while Acosta strategized with his colleague Sloman to manage the new defense team and prevent them from escalating procedural complaints to Washington D.C. The document also notes Acosta's prior professional relationship with Starr and Lefkowitz from his time at their law firm, Kirkland & Ellis.
DOJ-OGR-00021209.jpg
This document details the legal team assembled by Epstein following the opening of a USAO investigation in late 2006. Epstein hired several high-profile attorneys, including former federal prosecutors Guy Lewis and Lilly Ann Sanchez, and later retained Kenneth Starr and Jay Lefkowitz of Kirkland & Ellis, who contacted the USAO on his behalf in August 2007. The defense team was further expanded with the addition of attorneys Martin Weinberg and Joe D. Whitley.
DOJ-OGR-00021195.jpg
This document is a Table of Contents (page xix) from a Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report regarding the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. It outlines findings that prosecutors (Acosta, Villafaña, Lourie) did not act on improper influence or provide improper benefits based on relationships with defense counsel. However, section V explicitly states that Acosta exercised 'poor judgment' in resolving the investigation through a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and a state plea deal based on flawed policy applications.
Jeffrey Epstein
Informing that the Deputy AG determined federal prosecution is appropriate. Epstein has until June 30, 2008 to comply with plea agreement terms including guilty plea and surrender.
Jeffrey Epstein
Notification that Deputy AG has determined federal prosecution is appropriate and setting deadline for surrender.
Independent Review
Confirmed USAO facilitated independent review by DOJ.
Summary of events during Epstein investigation
A letter from the prosecution that Kirkland & Ellis claims is fraught with inconsistencies and falsehoods.
Unknown
Informing Acosta that Epstein's team would seek Office's review.
Review request notification
Informing Acosta that Epstein's team would seek DOJ review.
confidential communication
Detailed legal argument against federal prosecution of Epstein, citing lack of evidence for federal crimes (phone use), witness testimony claiming they lied about age, and alleged FBI overreach. Requests meeting.
CEOS Review Scope
Advising that CEOS reviewed the matter only for 'abuse of discretion'.
Review Process
Stating the office did not intend to interfere with the review process.
None (Original Message)
Informs Acosta of a $50 million civil lawsuit against Epstein and the intent to notice a deposition for a [Redacted] individual.
Victim Notification
Sloman stated intention to begin notifying Epstein's victims.
Epstein: Victim Notification Letter
Forwarding the victim notification letter as requested.
Re: Epstein
Strong objection to the government sending a notification letter to alleged victims; argues it violates the spirit of negotiations and legal statutes (Justice for All Act vs Section 2255); accepts selection of Podhurst and Josephsberg.
Epstein
Discussing due diligence on Judge Davis' selection of mediators, citing the Justice for All Act of 2004 regarding victim notification, and setting a deadline for objections.
Epstein
Insisting on concluding the vetting process for Podhurst and Josephsberg; stating statutory obligation to notify victims under Justice for All Act; setting deadline for objection.
[Unknown/Blank]
Confirming that the Court will handle plea and sentencing on Jan 4 for agreed-upon counts.
Epstein
Attaching response to a November 5 letter.
Continuous Confinement
Sloman argued NPA required continuous confinement; warned USAO would investigate if exception was granted.
Epstein
Confirmation that Epstein's plea and sentence will occur on the same day, on or before January 4th.
RE: Epstein
Clarifying that Epstein waives rights to contest liability/damages under paragraph 8 of the agreement. Confirming the office does not want to be copied on discovery matters. Stating their role is limited to monitoring NPA breach.
RE: Epstein
Confirming a call to Judge Davis who is willing to serve as the 'decider'.
Re: Epstein
Inquiring about Judge Davis's willingness to take on a role. Discussing potential discovery to verify claims and asking if the office wants to be copied on subpoenas.
Epstein
Sender attaches an executed version of an addendum (epstein_addendum_10_30.pdf) and asks Jay to Fed Ex the original signature pages back.
Epstein
Sending an executed version of the addendum and requesting original signature pages via FedEx.
Epstein
Sending executed version of the addendum; requesting original signature pages via Fed Ex.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity