Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Mega Edition: The OIG Report Detailing The Investigation Into Epstein's NPA (Part 20-23) (7/23/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: The OIG Report Detailing The Investigation Into Epstein's NPA (Part 20-23) (7/23/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

0:00
Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
0:04
Speaker 1: In this episode, we're going to get a right back
0:06
Speaker 1: to the OIG report on the Jeffrey Epstein NPA, Part
0:11
Speaker 1: eight Post NPA negotiations. Almost immediately after the NPA was signed,
0:17
Speaker 1: conflicts arose about its terms, and the difficult negotiation process
0:21
Speaker 1: began anew The USAO quickly realized that there were numerous
0:25
Speaker 1: issues concerning the monetary Damage's provision that were not resolved
0:29
Speaker 1: in the NPA, and the parties differed in their interpretations
0:32
Speaker 1: of the Section two twenty five fifty five provision, in
0:36
Speaker 1: particular the role and duties of the attorney representatives for
0:40
Speaker 1: the victims. As negotiations regarding the damage's provision continued, the
0:44
Speaker 1: defense was able to delay having Epstein enter his guilty
0:48
Speaker 1: plea in state court a September through October two thousand
0:52
Speaker 1: and seven. Sloman's concerns about selection of an attorney representative
0:57
Speaker 1: lead to a proposed NPA adendum. The first controversy centered
1:02
Speaker 1: on the appointment of an attorney representative for the victims. Initially,
1:06
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna reached out to private attorney, who was one
1:09
Speaker 1: of several suggested tour for that role. Villa Fauna notified
1:13
Speaker 1: left Kowitz that she was recommending the attorney to serve
1:16
Speaker 1: as the victim's representative and suggested a phone conference to
1:20
Speaker 1: discuss that information the USAO could disclose to the attorney
1:24
Speaker 1: about the case. Villa Fauna told Lefkowitz that she had
1:27
Speaker 1: never met the attorney, but he had been recommended by
1:30
Speaker 1: a good friend in our appellate section and by one
1:34
Speaker 1: of the district judges in Miami. Over the next few days,
1:37
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna exchanged messages with the attorney about the possibility
1:40
Speaker 1: of his serving as the attorney representative. She also exchanged
1:44
Speaker 1: emails with left Kowitz, passing along procedural questions raised by
1:48
Speaker 1: the attorney. By the time Laurie had fully transitioned to
1:52
Speaker 1: his detail at the department's Criminal Division, Sloman, who had
1:55
Speaker 1: been on vacation during the week the NPA was finalized
1:59
Speaker 1: to return to the office, reviewed the final agreement and
2:02
Speaker 1: immediately expressed his disapproval of the provision authorizing the USAO
2:07
Speaker 1: to select an attorney representative for the victims, which he
2:10
Speaker 1: believed might raise the appearance of a conflict of interest. Instead,
2:13
Speaker 1: he proposed that a special master make the selection. Although
2:17
Speaker 1: evidently frustrated by Slowman's belated proposal, Vilafauna conveyed to left
2:22
Speaker 1: Kowitz the suggestion that a special Master be appointed to
2:26
Speaker 1: select the attorney representative rather than having the USAO make
2:29
Speaker 1: the selection. She provided left Kowitz a proposal regarding the
2:33
Speaker 1: Special Master's responsibilities, along with a draft letter to send
2:37
Speaker 1: to the Special Master explaining the procedure for selecting an
2:40
Speaker 1: attorney representative. Lefkowitz objected to this proposal in a letter
2:45
Speaker 1: to Villafauna, pointing out that the NPA did not provide
2:48
Speaker 1: for the appointment of a special Master. More importantly, Lefkowitz
2:52
Speaker 1: used a discussion of the special Master as an opening
2:55
Speaker 1: depress for other alterations to the language of the NPA,
2:58
Speaker 1: or at least to its interpretation. Focusing on the attorney representative,
3:03
Speaker 1: Lefkowitz argued that the attorney's role should be viewed as
3:06
Speaker 1: limited to negotiating settlements, and that the attorney was precluded
3:10
Speaker 1: from filing lawsuits on behalf of the victims who could
3:13
Speaker 1: not reach a negotiated settlement with Epstein. Lefkowitz proposed the
3:17
Speaker 1: selected attorney should evaluate the claims of each identified individual,
3:22
Speaker 1: negotiate a total fund amount with mister Epstein, then distribute
3:25
Speaker 1: the monies based on the strength of each case. For
3:28
Speaker 1: those identified individuals who elect not to settle with mister Epstein,
3:32
Speaker 1: they may proceed on their own, but by doing so,
3:34
Speaker 1: they would not be suing under Section twenty two fifty
3:37
Speaker 1: five as contemplated by the NPA, and therefore may not
3:41
Speaker 1: continue to be represented by the selected attorney. Lefkowitz also
3:45
Speaker 1: objected to Villafauna's draft letter to the Special Master, asserting
3:49
Speaker 1: that it was essential for the Defense to participate in
3:53
Speaker 1: crafting a mutually acceptable communication to the victims. Going further,
3:57
Speaker 1: Lefkowitz claimed that any contact between the US and the
4:01
Speaker 1: victims about the Section twenty two to fifty five provision
4:04
Speaker 1: would violate the Agreements Confidentiality provision. Lefkowitz admonish the government
4:10
Speaker 1: not to contact the victims to inform them of the
4:12
Speaker 1: resolution of the case, including the appointment of the selected
4:16
Speaker 1: attorney and the settlement process. Villafana forwarded lefkowitz letter to Sloman,
4:21
Speaker 1: complaining that the Defense interpretation of Section twenty two to
4:24
Speaker 1: fifty five procedure violated the clear language of the NPA,
4:28
Speaker 1: and asking can I please just indict them. Days later,
4:32
Speaker 1: Sanchez emailed Slowman and then sent the follow up letter,
4:35
Speaker 1: asking that Slowman helped resolve the issue regarding the attorney
4:39
Speaker 1: representative's role and arguing that Epstein never had intended by
4:43
Speaker 1: signing the NPA to promise to pay fees for the
4:46
Speaker 1: victim's civil lawsuits in the event a settlement cannot be reached.
4:50
Speaker 1: When Villa Fauna explained to Slowman her views on Sanchez's arguments,
4:54
Speaker 1: Sloman responded, I suggest that you communicate your proposal back
4:58
Speaker 1: to Sanchez. The more voices as they hear, the more
5:01
Speaker 1: wedges they try to drive between us. Villafana agreed, noting
5:04
Speaker 1: that there are so many of them over there, I'm
5:07
Speaker 1: afraid we are getting triple teamed. Villafana sent Sanchez a
5:11
Speaker 1: letter regarding the roles of the Special Master and Attorney Representative.
5:15
Speaker 1: The next day, October tenth, two thousand and seven, Lefkowitz
5:18
Speaker 1: sent a six page letter to Acosta as a follow
5:21
Speaker 1: up to our conversation yesterday, expressing serious disagreements with Villafana's
5:25
Speaker 1: view of the process for victims to claim Section twenty
5:29
Speaker 1: two to fifty five damages under the NPA. Lefkowitz reiterated
5:33
Speaker 1: the defense position that the attorney representative's role was meant
5:37
Speaker 1: to be limited to negotiating settlements for the victims rather
5:40
Speaker 1: than pursuing litigation. Lefkowitz claim that a requirement that Epstein
5:45
Speaker 1: pay the victims legal fees incurred from contested litigation would
5:49
Speaker 1: trigger profound ethical problems in that the attorney representative would
5:53
Speaker 1: have an incentive to reject settlement offers in order to
5:56
Speaker 1: incur more fees. In addition, Lefkowitz rejected Villafanna's view that
6:00
Speaker 1: Epstein had waived the right to challenge section twenty two
6:03
Speaker 1: to fifty five liability as to the victims who did
6:06
Speaker 1: not want to settle their claims, and contended that any
6:09
Speaker 1: such victim will have to prove, among other things, that
6:12
Speaker 1: they are victims under the enumerated statutes. Finally, Lefkowitz again
6:17
Speaker 1: argued that the USAO should not discuss the settlement process
6:20
Speaker 1: with the victims who were to be identified as eligible
6:23
Speaker 1: for settlement under twenty two fifty five. Miss Villafana proposes
6:28
Speaker 1: that either she or federal agents will speak with the
6:30
Speaker 1: victims regarding the settlement process. We do not think it
6:34
Speaker 1: is the government's place to be co counseled to the victims,
6:37
Speaker 1: nor should the FBI be their personal investigators. Neither federal
6:41
Speaker 1: agents nor anyone from your office should contact the victims
6:44
Speaker 1: to inform them of the resolution of the case, including
6:48
Speaker 1: appointment of the attorney representative and the settlement process. Not
6:52
Speaker 1: only would that violate the confidentiality of the agreement, but
6:55
Speaker 1: mister Epstein will also have no control over what is
6:58
Speaker 1: communicated to the victims at this most critical stage. We
7:02
Speaker 1: believe it is essential that we participate in crafting mutually
7:05
Speaker 1: acceptable communication to the victims. We further believe that communication
7:09
Speaker 1: between your office or your case agents and the victims
7:13
Speaker 1: might well violate Rule b E two B of the
7:16
Speaker 1: Federal Rule. As a criminal procedure, the powers of the
7:19
Speaker 1: Federal grand jury should not, even in appearance, be utilized
7:23
Speaker 1: to advance the interests of a party to a civil lawsuit.
7:27
Speaker 1: Leftkowitz concluded, I look forward to resolving these open issues
7:30
Speaker 1: with you. During our four to thirty call today, Philifauna
7:34
Speaker 1: was at the time on sick leave, and Slowman and
7:36
Speaker 1: Acosta exchange demls about crafting and addendum to the NPA
7:40
Speaker 1: to address the method of appointing an attorney representative and
7:43
Speaker 1: to articulate the representative's duties. The next day, October eleventh,
7:47
Speaker 1: two thousand seven, Slowman exchanged demails with Leftkowitz about the
7:51
Speaker 1: text of a proposed addendum. B October twelfth, two thousand seven,
7:56
Speaker 1: Acosta and defense attorney left Kowitz meet for breakfast on
8:00
Speaker 1: the morning after his scheduled afternoon phone call with Lefkowitz.
8:04
Speaker 1: Acosta exchanged emails with left Kowitz, arranging to meet for
8:08
Speaker 1: breakfast the following day, on October twelfth, two thousand seven,
8:12
Speaker 1: at a Marriott hotel in the West Palm Beach. Contemporaneous
8:15
Speaker 1: records showed that Acosta was previously scheduled to be in
8:18
Speaker 1: Palm Beach for a press event on October eleventh and
8:21
Speaker 1: to speak at the Palm Beach County Bench Bar conference
8:24
Speaker 1: the following midday, and that he stayed overnight at the Marriotte. However,
8:29
Speaker 1: as with Villafauna's publicly released emails to left Kowitz, this
8:32
Speaker 1: meeting between Acosta and Lefkowitz drew criticism when the media
8:36
Speaker 1: learned of it during the CVRA litigation. It was seen
8:39
Speaker 1: either as further evidence of the usao's willingness to meet
8:43
Speaker 1: with Epstein's attorneys while simultaneously ignoring the victims or as
8:47
Speaker 1: a meeting at which Acosta made secret agreements with the defense.
8:51
Speaker 1: Two letters written later in two thousand and seven referred
8:54
Speaker 1: to the breakfast meeting. In a December two thousand seven
8:57
Speaker 1: letter to Sanchez, Acosta stated that he had Sue Sponti
9:00
Speaker 1: proposed the addendum to mister Lefkowitz at an October meeting
9:04
Speaker 1: in Palm Beach in an attempt to avoid what I
9:06
Speaker 1: foresaw would likely be a litigous selection process. In an
9:11
Speaker 1: October twenty three, two thousand seven, letter from Lefkowitz to Acosta,
9:15
Speaker 1: less than two weeks after the breakfast meeting, Lefkowitz represented
9:19
Speaker 1: that during the meeting, Acosta assured me that the USAO
9:23
Speaker 1: would not intervene with the State Attorney's office regarding this
9:26
Speaker 1: matter or contact any of the identified individuals, potential witnesses,
9:30
Speaker 1: or potential civil claimants and their respective counsel in this matter,
9:34
Speaker 1: and that neither the USAO nor the FBI would intervene
9:38
Speaker 1: regarding the sentence mister Epstein receives pursuing too a plea
9:41
Speaker 1: with the state so long as the sentence does not
9:44
Speaker 1: violate state law. However, two days after receiving this letter,
9:48
Speaker 1: Acosta revised a response letter drafted by Sloman, adding the
9:51
Speaker 1: term inaccurate to describe Lefkowitz's claims that Acosta had promised
9:55
Speaker 1: not to intervene with the State Attorney's office, contact individual witnesses, claimants,
10:01
Speaker 1: or intervene regarding Epstein's sentence. The draft response stated, such
10:05
Speaker 1: a promise equates to the imposition of a gag order.
10:08
Speaker 1: Our office cannot and will not agree to this. A
10:11
Speaker 1: Costa told OPR that he did not remember the breakfast meeting,
10:14
Speaker 1: but he speculated that the meeting may have been prompted
10:17
Speaker 1: by defense complaints that Villa Fauna had recommended her boyfriend's
10:20
Speaker 1: partner to serve as attorney representative. Acosta said that the
10:25
Speaker 1: way this was reported in the press was that I
10:27
Speaker 1: negotiated the NPA over breakfast, which was inaccurate because the
10:31
Speaker 1: NPA had been signed weeks before the breakfast meeting. When
10:35
Speaker 1: asked about left kowitz description of their breakfast meeting discussion,
10:39
Speaker 1: a Costa told OPR that there were several instances in
10:42
Speaker 1: which left Kowitz and other defense counsel mischaracterized something he
10:46
Speaker 1: or an AAUSA said in a way that was misleading.
10:49
Speaker 1: Emails showed that immediately after the breakfast a cost of
10:53
Speaker 1: phone Slowman, who then emailed to left Kowitz or revision
10:56
Speaker 1: to the addendum language they had been negotiating, and who
10:59
Speaker 1: also later reported to Villa Fauna that Lefkowitz suggested revision
11:03
Speaker 1: had been rejected. Other emails show that the parties continued
11:07
Speaker 1: to be at odds about the proposed language of the
11:09
Speaker 1: NPA addendum for several days after the breakfast meeting. All right, folks,
11:14
Speaker 1: we're going to wrap up this episode here and in
11:16
Speaker 1: the next episode we're going to pick up with a.
11:18
Speaker 1: Costa agrees to the defense request to postpone Epstein's guilty plea.
11:22
Speaker 1: The parties continue to negotiate issues concerning the attorney representative,
11:27
Speaker 1: and finally reach agreement on the NPA addendum. All the
11:30
Speaker 1: information that goes with this episode can be found in
11:33
Speaker 1: the description box. What's up, everyone, and welcome back to
11:37
Speaker 1: the program. In this episode, we're getting right back to
11:40
Speaker 1: the OIG report and we're going to pick up where
11:43
Speaker 1: we left off. See A Costa agrees to the defense
11:46
Speaker 1: request to postpone Epstein's guilty plea. The parties continue to
11:50
Speaker 1: negotiate issues concerning the attorney representative and finally reach agreement
11:55
Speaker 1: on the NPA addendum. A week after his breakfast meeting
12:00
Speaker 1: with Acosta left, Kowitz, citing a scheduling conflicts, sent a
12:03
Speaker 1: Costa an email seeking his agreement to postpone Epstein's entry
12:07
Speaker 1: of his guilty plea in state court from October twenty six,
12:10
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, the date agreed to in the NPA,
12:13
Speaker 1: to November twentieth, two thousand and seven. In his email left,
12:17
Speaker 1: Kowitz reported that the State Attorney's office had agreed to
12:20
Speaker 1: the postponement, and he noted that Acosta had said during
12:23
Speaker 1: the breakfast meeting that he didn't want to dictate the
12:26
Speaker 1: schedule to the state. Acosta solicited input from Slowman, who
12:30
Speaker 1: later that day email left Kuwitz and agreed to the postponement.
12:35
Speaker 1: With Lori having departed from the USAO, Slowman became more
12:38
Speaker 1: involved in the negotiating the NPA addendum than he had
12:42
Speaker 1: been in the negotiations leading to the NPA, and he
12:45
Speaker 1: quickly came up against the problem Villa, Fauna and Lori
12:48
Speaker 1: had faced. The defense attorneys continued to negotiate provisions to
12:53
Speaker 1: which they had seemingly already agreed. Between October twelfth and nineteenth,
12:57
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, in a series of email exchange
13:00
Speaker 1: and phone conversations, Acosta, Sloman, Villa Fauna, and left Kowitz
13:04
Speaker 1: continued working on language for the NPA addendum, addressing the
13:09
Speaker 1: process for selection of the attorney representative and describing which
13:13
Speaker 1: of the representative's activities Epstein would be required to reimburse.
13:17
Speaker 1: Although it appeared that progress was being made towards reaching
13:21
Speaker 1: agreement on the terms of an addendum, on October nineteenth,
13:24
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, left Kowitz emailed Slowman identifying areas
13:28
Speaker 1: of concern with a proposal the USAO had made days before.
13:32
Speaker 1: Sloman forwarded the email to Acosta, noting that it replows
13:36
Speaker 1: some of what we accomplished this week and raised unnecessary issues.
13:40
Speaker 1: Sloman reported to Acosta that a victim in New York
13:44
Speaker 1: had filed a civil lawsuit against Epstein, and Villafana was
13:47
Speaker 1: concerned that this may be the real reason for the
13:50
Speaker 1: delay in the plea. She thinks that Epstein wants to
13:53
Speaker 1: knock that lawsuit out before the guilty plea to deter others.
13:57
Speaker 1: Slowman also alerted Acosta that newspaper reports indicated that Epstein
14:02
Speaker 1: had planted false stories in the press in an attempt
14:04
Speaker 1: to discredit the victims. On October twenty second, two thousand
14:08
Speaker 1: and seven, Sloman responded to the issues Leftkuwitz had raised,
14:12
Speaker 1: rejecting some defense proposals, but agreeing to modify certain language
14:16
Speaker 1: in the proposed addendum to satisfy your concern. Noting that
14:20
Speaker 1: the addendum had a revised letter to the Special Master
14:23
Speaker 1: were attached. Sloman ended by stating, this needs to be concluded,
14:27
Speaker 1: Alex and I believe that this is as far as
14:29
Speaker 1: we can go. Therefore, please advise me whether we have
14:32
Speaker 1: a deal no later than cob tomorrow. Nonetheless, the next day,
14:37
Speaker 1: Lefkowitz sent a Costa a three page letter reiterating the
14:40
Speaker 1: Epstein team's disagreements with the usao's interpretation of the NPA.
14:45
Speaker 1: Lefkowitz noted, however, that Epstein had every intention of honoring
14:49
Speaker 1: the terms of the NPA in good faith, and that
14:51
Speaker 1: the defense letter was not intended to be a recision
14:54
Speaker 1: or withdrawal from the terms of the NPA. Lefkowitz added,
14:58
Speaker 1: I also want to thank you your commitment that you
15:01
Speaker 1: made to me during our October twelfth meeting in which
15:04
Speaker 1: you promise genuine finality with regard to this matter and
15:07
Speaker 1: assured me that your office would not intervene with State
15:10
Speaker 1: Attorney's office regarding this matter or contact any of the
15:15
Speaker 1: identified individuals, potential witnesses, or potential civil claimants and their
15:19
Speaker 1: respective counsel in this matter, and that neither your office
15:23
Speaker 1: nor the FBI would intervene regarding the sentence mister Epstein
15:26
Speaker 1: receives pursuing too a plea with the state so long
15:30
Speaker 1: as that sentence does not violate state law. Indeed, so
15:33
Speaker 1: long as mister Epstein's sentence does not explicitly violate the
15:37
Speaker 1: terms of the agreement, he's entitled to any type of
15:40
Speaker 1: sentence available to him, including, but not limited to gain
15:44
Speaker 1: time and work release. Sloman forwarded the letter to Villa Fauna, commenting,
15:49
Speaker 1: wait until you see this one. Villafana replied, welcome to
15:52
Speaker 1: my world. I love the way they want to interpret
15:55
Speaker 1: this agreement. It also looks like they're planning to ask
15:59
Speaker 1: for and receive a sentence far lower than the one
16:02
Speaker 1: we agree to. Has anyone talked to Barry Krisher about this?
16:05
Speaker 1: Maybe this is the real reason for the delay in
16:07
Speaker 1: entering the guilty plea. We also have to contact the
16:10
Speaker 1: victims to tell them about the outcome of the case
16:13
Speaker 1: and to advise them that an attorney will be contacting
16:16
Speaker 1: them regarding possible claims against mister Epstein. If we don't
16:20
Speaker 1: do that, it may be a violation of the Florida
16:23
Speaker 1: bar rules for the selected attorney to cold call the girls.
16:27
Speaker 1: Why don't we agreed a mutual recision and indictem Acosta
16:31
Speaker 1: also weighed in sending both Villa Fauna and Slowman an
16:34
Speaker 1: email with a subject line that read this has to stop,
16:37
Speaker 1: in which he stated, just read the letter. One. We
16:40
Speaker 1: specifically refuse to include the provision, saying that we would
16:44
Speaker 1: not communicate if I recall the conference call. We told
16:47
Speaker 1: them we could not agree to a gag order using
16:49
Speaker 1: those words. Two, the purpose of the agreement was not
16:53
Speaker 1: an out of court settlement. Seems that they can't take no,
16:57
Speaker 1: let's talk how to proceed. I'm not sure we will
17:00
Speaker 1: never her agree on a letter to the Special Master
17:02
Speaker 1: about how to select an attorney representative at that point,
17:05
Speaker 1: notwithstanding Acosta's assessment and prediction, after Slowman sent the letter
17:10
Speaker 1: to Lefkowitz, a new draft addendum, and they spoke by phone.
17:13
Speaker 1: The parties reached agreement on the addendum's terms. On October
17:17
Speaker 1: twenty fifth, two thousand and seven, Slowman sent a letter
17:20
Speaker 1: to the person whom the USAO had selected to serve
17:23
Speaker 1: as Special Master, outlining the special Master's duties. A few
17:27
Speaker 1: days later, on October twenty ninth, two thousand and seven,
17:30
Speaker 1: Epstein and his attorneys left court in Sanchez signed the
17:33
Speaker 1: NPA addendum. Villafana's name was printed as the USAO representative,
17:38
Speaker 1: but at Villafana's request, Slowman signed the addendum for her
17:41
Speaker 1: on behalf of the USAO. Villafana later emailed Slowman, thanking
17:46
Speaker 1: him for the advice in the Pep Talk, which apparently
17:49
Speaker 1: related to the defense attorney's allegations of impropriety concerning her
17:53
Speaker 1: initial selection of the private attorney to assist the victims.
17:56
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna explained to Slowman, the funny thing is that
18:00
Speaker 1: I never met and still haven't met or spoken to
18:03
Speaker 1: the private attorney before I asked him if he would
18:05
Speaker 1: be willing to take on this case. But as soon
18:07
Speaker 1: as you mentioned the appearance problem, I saw where the
18:10
Speaker 1: problem would arise and agreed that the Special Master would
18:13
Speaker 1: be a safer route. I just worry that the defense
18:16
Speaker 1: attacks on me could harm the victims. Sloman responded that
18:19
Speaker 1: Defense Council had put an insidious spin on Villafana's role
18:23
Speaker 1: in proposing the private attorney, but Slowman added, I hope
18:27
Speaker 1: that you understand that these ad hominem attacks against you
18:30
Speaker 1: do not diminish in our eyes what you and the
18:33
Speaker 1: agents have accomplished. D Epstein further delays his guilty plea.
18:38
Speaker 1: The addendum did not bring the case to conclusion. Instead,
18:41
Speaker 1: the matter entered a new protracted phase, which involved the
18:44
Speaker 1: upper echelons of the Department of Justice. Despite the fact
18:47
Speaker 1: that Epstein and his attorneys had signed the NPA, they
18:50
Speaker 1: pursued a new strategy of appealing to senior department managers
18:54
Speaker 1: with the goal of setting aside the NPA entirely. Although
18:58
Speaker 1: ultimately unsuccessful, the strategy he delayed the entry of Epstein's
19:01
Speaker 1: guilty plea by months. On October twenty ninth, two thousand
19:05
Speaker 1: and seven, Villa Fauna emailed Slowman, raising several issues that
19:09
Speaker 1: she wanted Slowman to address with Lefkowitz. Among other things,
19:13
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna pointed out that the NPA required Epstein to
19:16
Speaker 1: use his best efforts to comply with the agreement, but
19:19
Speaker 1: he had failed to comply with the timeline established by
19:23
Speaker 1: the NPA when he sought and obtained a plea hearing
19:26
Speaker 1: postponement from October twenty sixth to November twentieth. Responding to
19:31
Speaker 1: lefkowitz attempts to limit the usao's communications with various entities
19:36
Speaker 1: and individuals, Villa Fauna noted that the USAO needed to
19:40
Speaker 1: be able to communicate with the State Attorney's Office and
19:43
Speaker 1: the victim's attorney to ensure that Epstein is abiding by
19:46
Speaker 1: the terms of his agreement. That same day, Assistant State
19:49
Speaker 1: Attorney Bellehovlik informed Slowman that the state judge assigned to
19:53
Speaker 1: the case had scheduled Epstein's plea and sentence in early
19:57
Speaker 1: January two thousand and eight. Bellehovlk assured Sloman that the
20:00
Speaker 1: plea and sentence will definitely occur before the January fourth
20:04
Speaker 1: date that was agreed on by all for sentencing. Nonetheless,
20:07
Speaker 1: emails over the course of the next month show that
20:10
Speaker 1: the USAO, the State Attorney's Office, the Defense Council continued
20:14
Speaker 1: to communicate regarding the date of the guilty plea, with
20:17
Speaker 1: the USAO asserting that a proposed January seventh, two thousand
20:21
Speaker 1: and eight date for the entry of Epstein's guilty plea
20:24
Speaker 1: was unacceptable, while the defense contended that Epstein had not
20:28
Speaker 1: agreed to any date. Finally, after multiple communications referring to
20:32
Speaker 1: various potential dates, on December seventh, two thousand and seven,
20:36
Speaker 1: Epstein attorney Jack Goldberger issued a notice of hearing setting
20:40
Speaker 1: the case for January fourth, two thousand and eight. E
20:43
Speaker 1: Epstein seeks Department review of the NPA Section twenty two
20:47
Speaker 1: to fifty five provision relating to monetary damages for the victims.
20:52
Speaker 1: With Epstein's plea hearing delayed, he launched a new effort
20:55
Speaker 1: to undermine the validity of the NPA, this time within
20:58
Speaker 1: the department. November sixteenth, two thousand and seven, Epstein attorney
21:03
Speaker 1: Kenneth Starr called the Office of Assistant Attorney General for
21:06
Speaker 1: the Criminal Division, Alish Fisher, and left a message that
21:09
Speaker 1: he was calling regarding Epstein. At Fisher's request, Lorie, who
21:13
Speaker 1: in late September two thousand and seven began serving his
21:16
Speaker 1: detail as Fisher's principal deputy and chief of staff, return
21:20
Speaker 1: the call. Fisher told OPR that she had no recollection
21:23
Speaker 1: of this call, and Laurie also could not recall for
21:26
Speaker 1: OPR the substance of his conversations with Starr, other than
21:30
Speaker 1: that it was likely about Epstein's wish to have the
21:33
Speaker 1: Department review the case. On November twenty eighth, two thousand
21:37
Speaker 1: and seven, Starr requested by letter of meeting with Fisher.
21:40
Speaker 1: In his letter, Star argued that the USAO improperly had
21:44
Speaker 1: compelled Epstein to agree to pay civil damages under US
21:48
Speaker 1: Code eighteen, Section twenty two fifty five as part of
21:51
Speaker 1: a state based resolution of a criminal case. On that
21:54
Speaker 1: same day, Lefkowitz emailed Slowman complaining about the usao's plant
21:58
Speaker 1: to notify victims about the twenty two to fifty five
22:01
Speaker 1: provision and alerting Slowman that Epstein's council we're seeking a
22:06
Speaker 1: meeting with the Assistant Attorney General to address what we
22:09
Speaker 1: believe is the unprecedented nature of the section twenty two
22:12
Speaker 1: to fifty five component of the NPA. After Lori sent
22:15
Speaker 1: to Slowman a copy of the Star letter, Slowman forwarded
22:19
Speaker 1: it to Villa Fauna, asking her to prepare a chronology
22:22
Speaker 1: of the plea negotiations. And how the twenty two to
22:25
Speaker 1: fifty five provision evolved. Villafana responded that she was going
22:29
Speaker 1: through all of the ways in which they have tried
22:31
Speaker 1: to breach the agreement to convince you guys to let
22:34
Speaker 1: me indict. All right, we're going to wrap up this
22:36
Speaker 1: episode here and in the next episode we're going to
22:39
Speaker 1: pick up where we left off. All of the information
22:42
Speaker 1: that goes with this episode can be found in the
22:44
Speaker 1: description box. What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the
22:47
Speaker 1: Epstein chronicles. In this episode, we're getting right back to
22:51
Speaker 1: the OIG report into Jeffrey Epstein's non prosecution agreement. In Washington, DC,
22:58
Speaker 1: Louri consulted with CEO's chief Osterbon, asking for his thoughts
23:02
Speaker 1: on defense counsel's arguments. At the same time, at Lourie's request,
23:06
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna sent the NPA and its addendum to Louri
23:09
Speaker 1: and Osterbon. Osterbon responded to Lori that he was not
23:13
Speaker 1: thrilled about the NPA, described Epstein's conduct as unusually egregious,
23:17
Speaker 1: particularly because of its serial nature, and observed that the
23:21
Speaker 1: NPA was pretty advantageous for the defendant and not all
23:25
Speaker 1: that helpful to the victims. He opined however, that the
23:28
Speaker 1: Assistant Attorney General would not and should not consider or
23:31
Speaker 1: address the NPA other than say that she agrees with it.
23:35
Speaker 1: During her OPR interview, Fischer did not recall reading Starr's
23:38
Speaker 1: letter or discussing it with Osterbon, but believed the comment
23:42
Speaker 1: about her agreeing with it referred to a federal prosecution
23:45
Speaker 1: of Epstein, which she believed was appropriate. She told OPR, however,
23:49
Speaker 1: that she played no role in the NPA and did
23:52
Speaker 1: not review or approve the agreement either before or after
23:55
Speaker 1: it was signed. As set fourth and more detail in
23:58
Speaker 1: chapter three of this report, Villa Fauna planned to notify
24:01
Speaker 1: the victims about the NPA and its section twenty two
24:04
Speaker 1: to fifty five provision, as well as about the state
24:07
Speaker 1: plea hearing, and she provided a draft of the notification
24:10
Speaker 1: letter to left Kowitz four comments. On November twenty ninth,
24:13
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, left Kowitz sent a Costo a
24:16
Speaker 1: letter complaining about the draft notification to the victims. Lefkowitz
24:20
Speaker 1: asked USAO to refrain from notifying the victims until after
24:25
Speaker 1: Defense counsel met with Assistant Attorney General Fisher, which he
24:28
Speaker 1: anticipated would take place the following week. Internal emails indicate
24:32
Speaker 1: that Lori contacted Osterbahn about his availability for a meeting
24:36
Speaker 1: with Starr, but both Fisher and Laurie told OPR that
24:40
Speaker 1: such a meeting never took place, and OPR found no
24:43
Speaker 1: evidence that it did. Acosta promptly responded to Lefkowitz by
24:47
Speaker 1: letter directing him to raise his concerns about victim notification
24:51
Speaker 1: with Villa, Fauna or Sloman. Acosta also addressed Epstein's evident
24:56
Speaker 1: efforts to stop the NPA from being enforced. Since the
24:59
Speaker 1: signing of the September twenty fourth agreement more than two
25:02
Speaker 1: months ago, it has become clear that several attorneys on
25:05
Speaker 1: your legal team are dissatisfied with that result. You. Professor Dershowitz,
25:10
Speaker 1: former Solicitor Star, former United States Attorney Lewis miss Sanchez,
25:15
Speaker 1: Black Goldberg, and left Court previously had the opportunity to
25:18
Speaker 1: review and raise objections to the terms of the agreement.
25:21
Speaker 1: The defense team, however, after extensive negotiation, chose to adopt
25:25
Speaker 1: the agreement. Since then, Council have objected to several steps
25:29
Speaker 1: taken by the U S. Attorney's Office to effectuate the
25:31
Speaker 1: terms of the agreement, in essence presenting collateral challenges to
25:36
Speaker 1: portions of the agreement. It is not the intention of
25:40
Speaker 1: this office ever to require a defendant tend to applee
25:43
Speaker 1: against his wishes. Your client has the right to proceed
25:46
Speaker 1: to trial if your client is dissatisfied with this agreement
25:49
Speaker 1: or believes that it is unvalid, unlawful, or unfair, we
25:53
Speaker 1: stand ready to unwine the agreement. In a separate seven
25:56
Speaker 1: page letter to Star, with Villafana and Sloman's input, a
25:59
Speaker 1: cost to respond it to the substance of Starr's November
26:02
Speaker 1: twenty eighth letter to assist an Attorney General Fisher. Fischer
26:06
Speaker 1: told OPR that she did not recall Hyacosta rather than
26:09
Speaker 1: her office responded to the letter, but she conjectured that
26:13
Speaker 1: probably I was trying to make sure that somebody responded
26:16
Speaker 1: since the Criminal Division wasn't going to respond. In his
26:19
Speaker 1: seven page letter sent a Star on December fourth, two
26:22
Speaker 1: thousand and seven, Acosta wrote, the non prosecution agreement entered
26:26
Speaker 1: into between this office and mister Epstein response to mister
26:29
Speaker 1: Epstein's desire to reach a global resolution of his state
26:32
Speaker 1: and federal criminal liability. Under this agreement, this District has
26:36
Speaker 1: agreed to defer prosecution for enumerated sections of Title eighteen
26:41
Speaker 1: in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida provided
26:44
Speaker 1: mister Epstein satisfies three general federal interests, one that mister
26:48
Speaker 1: Epstein plead guilty to a registrable offense, two that this
26:52
Speaker 1: plea include a binding recommendation for a sufficient term of imprisonment,
26:56
Speaker 1: and three that the agreement not harmed the interests of
26:59
Speaker 1: his victims. A Costa explained in the letter that usao's
27:02
Speaker 1: intent was to place the identified victims in the same
27:05
Speaker 1: position as they would have been if mister Epstein was
27:08
Speaker 1: convicted at trial, no more, no less. Acosta documented the
27:13
Speaker 1: usao's understanding of the operation of the NPA's Section twenty
27:17
Speaker 1: two fifty five provision, recounted the history of the NPA negotiations,
27:21
Speaker 1: and described the post signing efforts by Epstein's council to
27:25
Speaker 1: challenge portions of the NPA. Acosta's letter concluded, although it
27:29
Speaker 1: happens rarely, I do not mind this office decision being
27:32
Speaker 1: appealed to Washington, and have previously directed our prosecutors to
27:36
Speaker 1: delay filings in this case to provide defense counsel with
27:40
Speaker 1: the option of appealing our decisions Indeed, although I am
27:43
Speaker 1: confident in our prosecutor's evidence and legal analysis, I nonetheless
27:47
Speaker 1: directed them to consult with the subject matter experts in
27:50
Speaker 1: CEOs to confirm our interpretation of the law before approving
27:54
Speaker 1: their charges. I am thus surprised to read a letter
27:57
Speaker 1: addressed to Department Headquarters that raises issue chose that either
28:01
Speaker 1: have not been raised with this office previously, or that
28:04
Speaker 1: have been raised and in fact resolved in your client's favor.
28:07
Speaker 1: I am troubled likewise by the apparent lack of finality
28:10
Speaker 1: in this agreement. The Usays who have been negotiating with
28:14
Speaker 1: Defense Counsel have for some time complained to me regarding
28:17
Speaker 1: the tactics used by the Defense team. It appears to
28:20
Speaker 1: them that as soon as resolution is reached on one issue,
28:23
Speaker 1: Defense Counsel finds ways to challenge the resolution collaterally. My
28:28
Speaker 1: response thus far has been that Defense Council is doing
28:30
Speaker 1: its job to vigorously represent the client that said, there
28:34
Speaker 1: must be closure on this matter. Some in our office
28:36
Speaker 1: are deeply concerned that Defense Council will continue to amount
28:39
Speaker 1: collateral challenges to provisions of the agreement even after mister
28:43
Speaker 1: Epstein has entered his guilty plea and thus rendered the
28:46
Speaker 1: agreement difficult, if not unpossible, to unwind. I would reiterate
28:51
Speaker 1: that this is not the intention of the office to
28:53
Speaker 1: ever force the hand of a defendant to enter into
28:55
Speaker 1: an agreement against his wishes. Your client has the right
28:58
Speaker 1: to proceed to trial, although time is of the essence,
29:01
Speaker 1: I am directing our prosecutors not to issue victim notification
29:05
Speaker 1: letters until this Friday to provide you with time to
29:08
Speaker 1: review these options with your client. We expect a written
29:11
Speaker 1: decision by December seventh, two thousand and seven, at five pm,
29:15
Speaker 1: indicating whether the defense team wishes to reaffirm or to
29:18
Speaker 1: unwind the agreement. Acosta explained to OPR that he did
29:23
Speaker 1: not view the letter as inviting department review, but he
29:26
Speaker 1: believed that department had the right to address Epstein's concerns. Moreover,
29:30
Speaker 1: the usao's only option at the time was to declare
29:33
Speaker 1: Epstein in breach of the NPA, which would have prompted
29:36
Speaker 1: litigation as to whether Epstein was in fact in breach.
29:40
Speaker 1: Acosta noted that Defense Council repeatedly proclaimed Epstein's intent to
29:44
Speaker 1: abide by the agreement, making any USAO effort to declare
29:48
Speaker 1: him in breach more difficult. In fact, the day after
29:51
Speaker 1: receiving Acosta's letter, Star and left Quitz responded to Acosta
29:55
Speaker 1: with copies to Slowman and the Assistant Attorney General Fisher
30:00
Speaker 1: that the defense first and foremost reaffirmed the NPA, that
30:03
Speaker 1: Epstein had no intention of unwinding his agreement. On December seventh,
30:07
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, the deadline set by Acosta in
30:10
Speaker 1: his December fourth, two thousand and seven letter to Star,
30:13
Speaker 1: the defense transmitted to the USAO one sentence affirmation of
30:17
Speaker 1: the NPA and its addendum signed by Epstein. F despite
30:22
Speaker 1: affirming the NPA Defense Council intensify their challenges to it,
30:27
Speaker 1: and accused Villa Fauna of improper conduct. One December seventh
30:31
Speaker 1: and eleventh, two thousand and seven, Star and Leftkuwit send
30:34
Speaker 1: to Acosta letters and ethics opinions complaining about the federal
30:38
Speaker 1: investigation and Villa Fauna. On the same day that the
30:42
Speaker 1: defense team sent Epstein's affirmation to the USAO, Star and
30:46
Speaker 1: Left Kuwitz sent to Acosta two independent ethics opinions, one
30:50
Speaker 1: authored by prominent criminal defense attorney and former U S
30:53
Speaker 1: attorney Joe Whitley, which assessed purported improprieties in the federal
30:57
Speaker 1: investigation of Epstein and the by a prominent retired federal
31:02
Speaker 1: judge and former U S attorney arguing against the NPA's
31:05
Speaker 1: use of civil damage's recovery provision under US Code eighteen,
31:09
Speaker 1: section twenty two fifty five as a proxy for traditional
31:13
Speaker 1: criminal restitution. Days later, on December eleventh, two thousand seven,
31:18
Speaker 1: Star sent a letter to Acosta transmitting two lengthy submissions
31:22
Speaker 1: authored by left Kuwitz, presenting substantative challenges to the NPA
31:26
Speaker 1: and to the background and conduct of the investigation. These
31:30
Speaker 1: submissions repeated arguments previously raised by the defense, but also
31:34
Speaker 1: asserted new issues. In one submission, twenty pages long, left
31:38
Speaker 1: Kowitz addressed the improper involvement of federal authorities in the
31:41
Speaker 1: investigation and criticized Villafauna for a number of alleged improprieties,
31:46
Speaker 1: including having engaged in unprecedented federal overreaching by seeking to
31:51
Speaker 1: prosecute Epstein federally, insisting that the state attorney's office charged
31:55
Speaker 1: mister Epstein with violations of law and recommend a sentence
31:59
Speaker 1: that are significantly horg pr sure than what the state
32:01
Speaker 1: deemed appropriate, and requiring that Epstein plead guilty to a
32:05
Speaker 1: registrable offense, a harsh condition that was unwarranted. Lefkowitz also
32:11
Speaker 1: argued that the federal investigation relied upon a state investigation
32:15
Speaker 1: that was tanked by the lead PBPD detectives, misrepresentation of
32:19
Speaker 1: key facts and affidavids, and interview summaries, leading the USAO
32:24
Speaker 1: to make its charging decision based on flawed information that
32:27
Speaker 1: compromised the federal investigation. Finally, left Kowitz criticized federal involvement
32:33
Speaker 1: in the state plea process as a violation of the
32:35
Speaker 1: tenants of the petit Policy. In a second thirteen page submission,
32:39
Speaker 1: left Kowitz reiterated Epstein's complaints about the section twenty two
32:43
Speaker 1: to fifty five component of the NPA, arguing, among other things,
32:47
Speaker 1: that federal prosecutors should not be in the business of
32:50
Speaker 1: helping allege victims of state crimes secure civil financial settlements.
32:55
Speaker 1: Notwithstanding these voluminous submissions, Lefkowitz added that Epstein on one
33:00
Speaker 1: conditionally reasserts his intention to fulfill and not seek to
33:03
Speaker 1: withdraw from or unwind the NPA. Two. As a result
33:08
Speaker 1: of the star in left Kowitz submissions, the new USAO
33:11
Speaker 1: Criminal Chief begins a full review of the evidence, and
33:14
Speaker 1: Acosta agrees to meet again with defense counsel. After reviewing
33:19
Speaker 1: Starr in Lefkowitz letters, Sloman notified Villa Fauna that, in
33:22
Speaker 1: light of the recent Kirkland and Ellis correspondence, he had
33:25
Speaker 1: asked Robert Senior, who had succeeded Menchell as chief of
33:29
Speaker 1: the usao's Criminal Division, to review di novo the evidence
33:33
Speaker 1: underlying the proposed revised indictments, and Sloman asked Villa Fauna
33:37
Speaker 1: to provide Signor or Senior with all the state and
33:40
Speaker 1: FBI investigative materials. In the meantime, Acosta agreed to meet
33:46
Speaker 1: with Starr and other Epstein defense attorneys to discuss the
33:49
Speaker 1: defense complaints raised in left Kowitz December eleventh, two thousand
33:53
Speaker 1: seven submissions. The meeting took place in Miami on December fourteenth,
33:57
Speaker 1: two thousand seven. The defense team included Starr, Dershowitz, left Court,
34:01
Speaker 1: and Boston attorney Martin Weinberg. The USAO side included Acosta, Sloman,
34:06
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna, and another senior AUSA with the Miami FBI
34:10
Speaker 1: Special Agent in Charge and Assistant Special Agent in Charge
34:14
Speaker 1: also present. In addition to previously raised arguments. During this meeting,
34:19
Speaker 1: Epstein's attorneys raised a new argument that the state charge
34:22
Speaker 1: to which Epstein had agreed to plead guilty did not
34:25
Speaker 1: apply to the facts of the case. All right, we're
34:28
Speaker 1: going to wrap up this episode here, and in the
34:29
Speaker 1: next episode, we're going to pick up with three. The
34:32
Speaker 1: defense notifies Acosta that it may pursue a department review
34:36
Speaker 1: of the usao's actions. All of the information that goes
34:39
Speaker 1: with this episode can be found in the description box.
34:43
Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein chronicles.
34:47
Speaker 1: In this episode, we're getting right back to the OIG
34:49
Speaker 1: report into the Jeffrey Epstein non prosecution agreement. Three. The
34:54
Speaker 1: defense notifies Acosta that it may pursue a department review
34:58
Speaker 1: of the usao's actions. Shortly after the December fourteenth, two
35:02
Speaker 1: thousand and seven meeting left, Kuwitz notified Acosta that if
35:05
Speaker 1: the issues raised at the meeting could not be resolved promptly,
35:09
Speaker 1: the defense team may have no alternative but to seek
35:11
Speaker 1: review in Washington. Acosta notified Assistant Attorney General Fisher that
35:16
Speaker 1: the defense team might make an appeal tour, and he
35:19
Speaker 1: asked to grant such a request for review to in fact,
35:23
Speaker 1: review this case in an expedited matter in order to
35:26
Speaker 1: preserve the January fourth plea deal star and Leftquwitz then
35:30
Speaker 1: sent to Acosta a lengthy letter with numerous previously submitted
35:34
Speaker 1: Defense submissions, reviewing issues discussed at the meeting and advising
35:39
Speaker 1: that Epstein sought a prompt, independent, expedited review of the
35:43
Speaker 1: evidence by you or someone you trust. The letter reiterated
35:46
Speaker 1: Epstein's position that his conduct did not amount to a
35:50
Speaker 1: registrable offense under state law or a violation of federal law,
35:55
Speaker 1: and with respect to the NPA's Section twenty two to
35:58
Speaker 1: fifty five provision, that it was a proper to require
36:00
Speaker 1: Epstein to pay damages to individuals who do nothing but
36:04
Speaker 1: simply assert a claim under the statute. Four. Acosta attempts
36:09
Speaker 1: to revise the NPA Section twenty two to fifty five
36:12
Speaker 1: language concerning monetary damages, but the Defense does not accept it.
36:16
Speaker 1: Acosta undertook to respond to Defense Council's continuing concern about
36:21
Speaker 1: the Section twenty two to fifty five provision. He sent
36:24
Speaker 1: to Deputy Assistant Attorney General Sigel Mandelker language that he
36:28
Speaker 1: proposed including in a revision to the NPA Section twenty
36:33
Speaker 1: two to fifty five implementation section. Mandelker forwarded the language
36:37
Speaker 1: to her counterpart in the Civil Division, who responded to
36:40
Speaker 1: Mandulker and Acosta that he did not have any insight
36:43
Speaker 1: to offer. On December ninth, two thousand and seven, after
36:46
Speaker 1: Acosta and Sloman had a phone conversation with Star and Lefkowitz,
36:50
Speaker 1: Acosta sent to Sanchez a letter proposing to resolve our
36:54
Speaker 1: disagreements over interpretation by replacing the existing language of the
36:59
Speaker 1: NPA relaying to section twenty two to fifty five with
37:02
Speaker 1: a provision that would read, any person who, while a minor,
37:05
Speaker 1: was a victim of a violation of an offense enumerated
37:08
Speaker 1: in Title eighteen United States Code, Section twenty two to
37:12
Speaker 1: fifty five will have the same rights to proceed under
37:15
Speaker 1: Section twenty two to fifty five as she would have
37:17
Speaker 1: had if mister Epstein had been tried federally and convicted
37:21
Speaker 1: of enumerated offenses. For purposes of implementing this paragraph, the
37:25
Speaker 1: United States shall provide mister Epstein's attorneys with a list
37:28
Speaker 1: of individuals whom it was prepared to name as victims
37:32
Speaker 1: of an enumerated offense by mister Epstein. Any judicial authority
37:37
Speaker 1: interpreting this provision, including any authority determining which evidentiary burdens,
37:42
Speaker 1: if any a plaintiff must meet, shall consider that it
37:46
Speaker 1: is the intent of the parties to place these identified
37:49
Speaker 1: victims in the same position as they would have been
37:52
Speaker 1: had mister Epstein been convicted at trial. No more, no less.
37:57
Speaker 1: Acosta also noted that he had resisted his prose Cocuter's
38:00
Speaker 1: urging to declare the NPA breached by the defense delays.
38:04
Speaker 1: Left Gowitz responded by letter a few days later, suggesting
38:07
Speaker 1: that Acosta's proposal raise several troubling questions and that the
38:11
Speaker 1: problem arises from the incongruity that exists when attempting to
38:15
Speaker 1: fit a federal civil remedy statute into a criminal plea agreement.
38:20
Speaker 1: In a follow up letter to Acosta to address the
38:22
Speaker 1: usao's concern that Epstein was intentionally delaying the entry of
38:26
Speaker 1: his guilty plea left Gowitz asserted that any impediment to
38:30
Speaker 1: the resolution at issue is a direct cause of the
38:33
Speaker 1: disagreements between the parties, and that Defense Council had at
38:37
Speaker 1: all times made and will continue to make, sincere efforts
38:40
Speaker 1: to resolve and finalize issues as expeditiously as possible. Acosta
38:45
Speaker 1: told o PR that despite this assurance from the Defense Council,
38:49
Speaker 1: he was increasingly frustrated by Epstein's desire to take an
38:52
Speaker 1: eleventh hour appeal to the department soon before the scheduled
38:57
Speaker 1: January fourth, two thousand and eight plea hearing. As soon
39:00
Speaker 1: became apparent, Acosta was unable to achieve an expedited review
39:04
Speaker 1: so that Epstein could plead guilty and be sentenced by
39:07
Speaker 1: January fourth, two thousand and eight, and plea in sentencing
39:11
Speaker 1: date was rescheduled. On January second, two thousand and eight,
39:14
Speaker 1: Sloman spoke with Assistant State Attorney Bellehovlk, who confirmed that
39:19
Speaker 1: the change of plea hearing had been postponed. In an
39:21
Speaker 1: email reporting this to Acosta in Villafauna, Sloman said that
39:25
Speaker 1: Epstein's local defense attorney, Goldberger, had told Bellehovlk the postponement
39:30
Speaker 1: was because the facts did not fit the proposed date charge,
39:33
Speaker 1: and that Bellohovlk told Sloman she agreed with that assessment.
39:37
Speaker 1: The next day, Vilafauna sent to Acosta and Slowman a
39:40
Speaker 1: local newspaper article reporting that Epstein's plea hearings was reset
39:45
Speaker 1: for March, and in exchange for it, the federal authorities
39:48
Speaker 1: would drop their investigation of them. Acosta also sent to
39:52
Speaker 1: Slowman and Villafauna an email memorializing a statement made to
39:56
Speaker 1: him by left Kowitz in a phone call that day
39:58
Speaker 1: I left. Kowitz may have made a mistake. Six months ago,
40:02
Speaker 1: Bellohovlik told us solicitation is not registrable. It turns out
40:06
Speaker 1: that the actual offense charged is five. January seventh, two
40:11
Speaker 1: thousand eight, Acosta and Slowman meet with Sanchez, who makes
40:14
Speaker 1: additional allegations of USAO misconduct. On January seventh, two thousand eight,
40:20
Speaker 1: Acosta and Sloman met with the defense attorney Sanchez at
40:24
Speaker 1: her request. According to meeting notes made by Sloman, among
40:27
Speaker 1: other things, Sanchez alleged that the usao's media spokesperson had
40:32
Speaker 1: improperly disclosed details of the Epstein case to a national
40:35
Speaker 1: news reporter, and Sanchez suggested that the USAO could avoid
40:39
Speaker 1: any potential ugliness in DC by agreeing to a watered
40:43
Speaker 1: down resolution for Epstein. After Acosta excused himself to attend
40:47
Speaker 1: another meeting and Slowman refused to speak further with Sanchez
40:50
Speaker 1: without a witness present she left. Later that day, Acosta
40:54
Speaker 1: and Sloman spoke by phone with Star Leftquwitz, and Sanchez,
40:57
Speaker 1: who expressed concern about the leak to the New Use media.
41:00
Speaker 1: Reiterated their objections to the NPA and pressed for the
41:04
Speaker 1: water down resolution, which they specified would mean allowing Epstein
41:08
Speaker 1: to plead to a charge of coercion instead of procurement,
41:11
Speaker 1: avoid serving jail time, and not register as a sexual offender.
41:15
Speaker 1: A note in the margin of Sloman's handwritten notes of
41:18
Speaker 1: the conversation reads were back to where we started in September.
41:22
Speaker 1: That evening, Villa Fauna expressed concern that the delay in
41:26
Speaker 1: resolving the matter was affecting the usao's ability to go
41:30
Speaker 1: forward with a prosecution should Epstein renege on his agreement,
41:34
Speaker 1: and she outlined for Acosta in Sloman the steps she
41:37
Speaker 1: proposed to take while Epstein was pursuing departmental review. Those
41:41
Speaker 1: steps included re establishing contact with victims, interviewing victims in
41:45
Speaker 1: New York and one victim who lived in a foreign country,
41:48
Speaker 1: making contact with potential sources of information in the Virgin Islands,
41:52
Speaker 1: and reinitiating proceedings to obtain Epstein's computers in the meantime,
41:57
Speaker 1: USAO Criminal Division Chief Rob Signor performed a soup to
42:02
Speaker 1: nuts review of the Epstein investigation, reviewing the indictment package
42:06
Speaker 1: and all of the evidence Villa Fauna had compiled. He
42:10
Speaker 1: told OPR that he could not recall the reason for
42:12
Speaker 1: his review, but opined that it was to establish whether,
42:16
Speaker 1: if the plea fell apart, he is chief would agree
42:19
Speaker 1: that we can go forward with the charges. He did
42:21
Speaker 1: not recall being concerned after completing the review that we
42:25
Speaker 1: did not have a lot of victims lined up already
42:28
Speaker 1: that were ready to testify, and that some victims might
42:30
Speaker 1: not be favorable for us. Nevertheless, he concluded that the
42:34
Speaker 1: proposed charges were sound, and he told Acosta that he
42:37
Speaker 1: would approve proceeding with a federal case. Six. Acosta asked
42:41
Speaker 1: CEOs to review the evidence. Notwithstanding Signor's favorable review, Acosta
42:47
Speaker 1: and Slowman and told Starr and Lefkowitz that they appreciated
42:51
Speaker 1: that the defense wanted a fresh face to conduct a review,
42:54
Speaker 1: and they noted that the criminal chief had not undertaken
42:57
Speaker 1: the in depth work associated with issues raised by the defense.
43:01
Speaker 1: They told the defense team that Acosta had asked CEOs
43:04
Speaker 1: to come on board and that CEO's chief Osterbaonn would
43:07
Speaker 1: designate an attorney having a national perspective to conduct a
43:11
Speaker 1: fresh review in light of the defense submissions. Osterbon assigned
43:15
Speaker 1: a CEO's trial attorney, whom Villa Fauna understood was to
43:19
Speaker 1: review the case and prepare for trial in the event
43:21
Speaker 1: Epstein did not consummate the NPA. The CEO's trial attorney
43:26
Speaker 1: traveled to Florida to review the case materials and to
43:29
Speaker 1: meet with Villa Fauna to discuss the case and interview
43:32
Speaker 1: some of the victims. After one such meeting, Villa Fanna
43:35
Speaker 1: wrote to a Costa and Sloman, we just interviewing three
43:38
Speaker 1: of the girls. I wish you could have been here
43:40
Speaker 1: to see how much this has affected them. One girl
43:43
Speaker 1: broke down sobbing so that we had to stop the
43:45
Speaker 1: interview twice within a twenty minute span. She regained her
43:48
Speaker 1: composure to continue a short time, but she said that
43:51
Speaker 1: she was having nightmares about Epstein coming after her, and
43:54
Speaker 1: that she started to break down again, so we stopped
43:57
Speaker 1: the interview. The second girl told us that she was
43:59
Speaker 1: very upset about the eighteen month deal she had read
44:02
Speaker 1: about in the paper. She said the eighteen months was nothing,
44:05
Speaker 1: and that she had heard that the girls could get restitution,
44:08
Speaker 1: but she would rather not get any money and have
44:11
Speaker 1: Epstein spend a significant time in jail. These girls deserve
44:15
Speaker 1: so much better than they have received so far, and
44:17
Speaker 1: I hate feeling that there is nothing I can do
44:19
Speaker 1: to help them. The CEO's trial attorney had substantial experience
44:24
Speaker 1: prosecuting child exploitation cases. She told oh PR that, in
44:28
Speaker 1: her view, the victim witnesses in this case presented a
44:30
Speaker 1: number of challenges for a prosecution. Some of the victims
44:34
Speaker 1: did not want to admit they had sexual contact with Epstein.
44:37
Speaker 1: Some had recruited other victims to provide Epstein massages and
44:41
Speaker 1: thus could have been charged as accomplices. Some had drug
44:44
Speaker 1: histories and things like that. Some could appear to have
44:47
Speaker 1: been complicit, and there is no evidence of physical violence
44:50
Speaker 1: against the victims. She did not regard these victims issues
44:54
Speaker 1: as insurmountable, but based on these alone, the cees trial
44:58
Speaker 1: attorney considered a potential process secution of Epstein to be
45:01
Speaker 1: a crapshoot. In addition, she told OPR that there were
45:04
Speaker 1: novel legal issues in the case that also presented difficulties.
45:08
Speaker 1: Although she believed these difficulties could be overcome shortly after
45:12
Speaker 1: the CEO's trial attorney met with the victims. However, things
45:16
Speaker 1: just stopped when Osterbaond instructed her to cease her involvement
45:20
Speaker 1: in the case and CEOs engaged in the Criminal Division
45:23
Speaker 1: review sought by Epstein's defense team. All Right, we're going
45:27
Speaker 1: to wrap this episode up here, and in the next episode,
45:29
Speaker 1: we're going to pick up where we left off with
45:31
Speaker 1: Section nine February through June two thousand and eight. The
45:34
Speaker 1: Department's review. All of the information that goes with this
45:38
Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box.