Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Mega Edition: The OIG Report Detailing The Investigation Into Epstein's NPA (Part 24-27) (7/24/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: The OIG Report Detailing The Investigation Into Epstein's NPA (Part 24-27) (7/24/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: In this episode, we're picking up where we left off
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: with the OIG report into Jeffrey Epstein's NPA. Part nine
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: February through June two thousand and eight. The Department's review.
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: Epstein's defense attorneys sought a broad review from the department,
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: one that would encompass the defense complaints about federal jurisdiction,
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: specific terms of the NPA, and the various allegations of
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: professional misconduct by USAO attorneys and other personnel. The Department, however,
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: only reviewed the issue of federal jurisdiction and never reviewed
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: the NPA or any specific provisions. Nonetheless, the process took
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: several months, as the defense appealed the first two CEOs
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: and the department's Criminal Division, and then to the Office
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: of the Deputy Attorney General. The chart set forth on
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: the following page shows the positions and relationship among the
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: individuals in those offices involved in communicating with the USAO
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: or Defense beginning in November two thousand and seven, or
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: in those offices reviews which continued through June of two
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: thousand and eight. Part A February through May fifteenth, two
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: thousand and eight review by CEOs and Criminal Division. On
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: February twenty first, two thousand and eight, soon after the
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: CEO's trial attorney met with victims, oster Bond spoke with
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: left Kowitz about CEO's role. In a subsequent email to Villafauna,
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: Sloman and Signor, Osterbon explained, I told left Kowitz that
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: all I wanted to do is help the process move forward,
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: and if they think we best help the process by
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: taking a fresh and objective look at the case and
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: their arguments, then that is what I want to do.
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: I told them that if that's what they want, if
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: that's what will help the process to move forward, then
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: I don't think it's advisable for CEO's partner with the
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: USAO on the case. He wants to think about that
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: and probably talk to his co council about whether it's
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: better to have US partnered in the case or just
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: serve as a review function, and he said he'd get
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: back to me later time. Osterbon told OPR that this
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: email reflects that he likely told Acosta that he intended
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: to limit CEO's role to review only, and Acosta asked
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: to make sure the defense is okay with that to
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: preempt the possible defense complain about CEO's involvement in the review.
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: Osterbon explained to OPR the defense kept bringing up new
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: arguments and new problems, and the USAO was saying, look,
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: if we're going to do this, if you've got a
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: problem with it, tell us now. By February twenty fifth,
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, Leftkowitz told Osterbon, who informed Slowman
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: that the CEO's role should be review only. Lori had
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: just left the department to enter private practice, and Osterbon
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: continued to keep his direct supervisor. Deputy Assistant Attorney General
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: Mandelker informed of the defense team contacts. Sloman email left
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: Kowitz that CEOs was ready to proceed immediately with a
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: review of the matter. Sloman advised left Kowitz that in
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: the event CEOs decides that that federal prosecution should not
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: be undertaken against mister Epstein, this office will close its investigation,
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: but that should CEOs disagree with mister Epstein's position, mister
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: Epstein shall have one week to abide by the NPA.
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: Sloman forwarded this email to Villa Fauna, who responded, why
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: would we possibly let him keep the same deal, after
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: all he has put us through and after we've discovered
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: six new girls. The defense soon signaled that the CEO's
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: review would not end the Epstein requests for the department's involvement.
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: On February twenty ninth, two thousand and eight, left Kowitz
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: requested a defense meeting with osterbon On March twelfth, two
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: thousand and eight, Star spoke to assist an Attorney General
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: Fisher and made it clear that the defense team would
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: want an audience with her if CEOs decided to support
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: the prosecution. On March six, two thousand and eight, Acosta
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: alerted Slowman and Ostrabon that Star in left Kowitz had
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: called him to express concern about Osterbond's participation in the
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: case and indicated that they may ask for more senior involvement.
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: A Costa informed them that they certainly have the right
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: to ask whomever they wanted for whatever they thought appropriate,
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: and whatever process would be given to them was up
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: to whomever they asked. The next day, left Kowitz followed
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: up with a Costa in an email. We appreciate that
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: you will afford us as much time as Main Justice
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: determines as appropriate for it to conduct a review of
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: this matter. As you have suggested, we will initiate the
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: review process with Drew Osterbond and engage in a discussion
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: with them about all the facts and circumstances, as well
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: as the legal and policy issues associated with the case. However,
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: due to our misgivings engendered because Drew has told us
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: that he sees himself as a prosecutor and has already
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: made clear he would be ready and willing to prosecute
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: this case himself, we may well find it necessary to
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: appeal an adverse determination by them within the DOJ. Can
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: Starr and I appreciate that you understand this and have
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: no objection to our seeking appellate review within the DOJ.
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: Star Lefkowitz and Martin Weinberg attended the March twelve, two
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: thousand and eight meeting, as well as the former Principal
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: Deputy Chief of CEOs who had joined the Epstein defense team, Osterbon. Mandelker,
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: and current CEO's deputy chief represented the department. The current
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: CEO's deputy chief told OPR that he recalled some back
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: and forth because the defense team was saying some outrageous things.
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: Both Osterbon and his deputy chief were disturbed that the
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: former CEO's principal deputy Chief, who had been an aggressive
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: advocate for child exploitation prosecutions, was supporting the defense position,
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: although according to the CEO's deputy chief, the former principal
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: deputy Chief gave only a week pitch that was not effective.
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: After the meeting, starn Lefkowitz made multiple written submissions to
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: the Criminal Division. One submission provided a lengthy list of
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: USAO actions that have caused US serious concern, including the
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: following federal involvement in state criminal prosecution without any communication
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: with state authorities, the issuance of legal process and document
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: requests for items that had no connection to conduct that issue,
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: the nomination of an individual closely associated with one of
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: the assistant United States Attorneys involved in the case to
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: serve as the victim's attorney representative, the insistence on a
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: victim notification letter inviting the victims to make sworn statements
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: at Epstein's sentencing, and the reported existence of a relationship
• 6:23
  Speaker 1: between Sloman and the law firm representing several of the
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: alleged victims in civil suits against Epstein. In another letter,
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: Star renewed the defense accusation that USAO improperly disclosed information
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: about the case to the media and accused Slowman and
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna of encouraging civil litigation against Epstein. Finally, in
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: a letter to Assistant Attorney General Fisher on May fourteenth,
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, Starthankedor for having spoken to him
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: the previous day, reiterated the defense team's various complaints, and
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: asked her to meet with them Lefkowitz and Whitley. Meanwhile,
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: Ostrabahd's deputy chief drafted a decision letter to be sent
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: from from Osterbond to Leftkowitz, and over the course of
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: several weeks, it was reviewed by and received input from
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: Deputy Assistant Attorney General Mandelker and Assistant Attorney General Fisher,
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: as well as the Criminal Division's Appellate Section regarding certain
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: legal issues and Office of Enforcement operations regarding the petite policy.
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: Osterband told OPR that, notwithstanding the defense submissions on a
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: wide variety of issues and complaints, ceos's review was limited
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: to determining whether there was a basis for a federal
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: prosecution of Epstein. Osterbond's letter, sent to Lefkowitz on May fifteenth,
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, notified the defense team that CEOs
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: had completed its independent evaluation of whether prosecution of Epstein
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: for federal criminal violations would contradict criminal enforcement policy interests.
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: The letter specified that CEOs reviewed addressed the narrow question
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: of whether a legitimate basis existed for a federal prosecution,
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: and that CEOs did not conduct a denovo review of
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: the facts, analyze issues relating to federal statutes that did
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: not pertain to child exploitation, or review the terms of
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: the NPA or the prosecutorial misconduct allegations. The letter stated that,
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: based on its examination of the material relevant to its
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: limited review of the matter, CEOs has concluded that federal
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: prosecution in this case would not be improper or inappropriate,
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: and that Acosta could properly use his discretion to authorize
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: prosecution in the case. On May nineteenth, two thousand and eight,
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: Lefkowitz reached out to Acosta to request a meeting and
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: specifically asked that Acosta not shunt me off till one
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: of your staff. Lefkowitz made several points in support of
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: the requests for a meeting. One CEO's letter acknowledged that
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: federal prosecution of Epstein would involve a novel application of
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: relevant federal statutes. Two CEO's conclusion that federal prosecution would
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: not be an abuse of discretion was hardly an endorsement
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: of the case. Three CEOs did not address Epstein's prosecutorial
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: misconduct allegations, and for critical new evidence in the form
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: of recent Defense Council depositions of victims confirmed that federal
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: prosecution is not appropriate in this case. Lefkowitz alluded to
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: the possibility of seeking further review of the matter by
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: the Deputy Attorney General or Attorney General should the defense
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: be unable to resolve this matter directly with Acosta. Acosta
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: declined the request to respond personally and directed Leftkowitz to
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: communicate with the trial team. That same day, Sloman sent
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: Lefkowitz a letter asking that all further communication about the
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: case be made to Villa Fauna or her immediate supervisor,
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: and reiterating that Acosta would not respond personally to council's
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: email or calls. Sloman noted that the USAO had bent
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: over backwards to exhaustively consider and reconsider Epstein's objections, but
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: these objections have finally been exhausted. Sloman advised that the
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: USAO would terminate the NPA unless Epstein implied with all
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: of its terms by the close of business on June second,
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, b May through June twenty third,
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight review by the Office of the
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: Deputy Attorney General. Also on May nineteenth, two thousand and eight,
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: Starn Whitley co authored a letter to Deputy Attorney General
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: Mark Philippe asking for a review of the federal involvement
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: in a quintessentially state matter. In the letter, they acknowledged
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: that CEOs had recently completed a very limited review of
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: the Epstein case, but contended that the full review of
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: all the facts is urgently needed at senior levels of
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: the Justice Department. They argued that federal prosecution of Epstein
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: was unwarranted and that the irregularity of conduct by prosecutors
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: and the unorthodox terms of the NPA are but beyond
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: any reasonable interpretation of the scope of a prosecutor's responsibilities.
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: They followed up with the second letter on May twenty seventh,
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, in which they asserted the bedrock
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: need for integrity in the enforcement of federal criminal laws
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: and the profound raised by the unprecedented extension of federal
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: laws to a prominent public figure who has close ties
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: to President Clinton required department review. On this latter point,
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: they argued that Epstein entered the public arena only by
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: virtue of his close personal association with former President Bill Clinton,
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: and that there is little doubt that the USAO never
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: would have contemplated a prosecution in the case if mister
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: Ebstein were just another John. This was the first defense
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: submission mentioning Epstein's connection to President Clinton and raising the
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: insinuation that the federal involvement in the investigation was due
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: to politics. In the May twenty seventh, two thousand and
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: eight letter to the Deputy Attorney General, Starr and Whitley
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: use the existing June second, two thousand and eight deadline
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: for the entry of Epstein's guilty plea to argue that
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: it made the need for review of the case all
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: that more exigent. John Roth, a senior Associate Deputy Attorney
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: General who was handling the matter, instructed the USAO to
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: rescind the deadline, and on May twenty eighth, two thousand
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: and eight, Slowman notified Lefkowitz that the USAO had postponed
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: the deadline pending completion of the review by the Deputy
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: Attorney General's office. Meanwhile, the Criminal Division forwarded to Roth
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: the prior defense emissions, describing them as an enormous amount
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: of material regarding the Epstein matter. On June three, two
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: thousand and eight, Slowman sent to Roth a lengthy letter
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: from Sloman to the Deputy Attorney General, recounting detail the
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: history of negotiations with Epstein's council, culminating in the NPA,
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: and addressing Epstein's claims a professional misconduct. Among the documents
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: omitted with the letter were the prosecution memorandum, one of
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: the proposed charging documents, and the NPA with its addendum,
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: and Acosta's December nineteenth, two thousand seven, letter to Sanchez.
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: As the review was ongoing in the office of the
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: Deputy Attorney General, State Attorney Krisher mentioned to the usao's
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: West Palm Beach manager that Krisher and Epstein's local defense attorney,
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: Jack Goldberger, had arrived at a resolution of Epstein's case
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: that would involve A ninety eight eight, but Krisher provided
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: no further information. Upon learning of this, Villa Fauna wrote
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: to her immediate supervisor please tell me that you're joking.
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: Maybe we should throw him a party and tell him
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: that we're sorry to have bothered him talking about Epstein.
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna and her immediate supervisor later had phoned an
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: email exchange with Krisher and with Epstein's local council to
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: insist that the state plea comply with the terms of
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: the NPA, or we will consider it a breach of
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: the agreement and proceed accordingly. Deputy Attorney General Philippe told
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: OPR he had never heard of Epstein before receiving Star's letter.
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: Following the office's standard protocol, stars letter was handled by
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: John Roth, an experienced federal prosecutor who had served some
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: years before as a USA in the USAO. Roth had
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: told OPR that he had never heard of Epstein. Roth
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: explained to OPR that he did not conduct an independent investigation,
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: interview witnesses, or meet with Epstein's counsel, and instead limited
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: his review to written material submitted by Epstein's attorneys and
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: by Sloman to the Deputy Attorney General's office, as well
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: as materials that the defense team and the USAO had
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: previously provided to CEOs and the Criminal Division Front Office
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: and that CEOs furnished to him. Roth discussed the matter
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: with two senior staff colleagues as well as with Deputy
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: Attorney General, who also reviewed the submissions. Roth told OPR
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: that it was his understanding that Epstein had reneged on
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: the NPA, and because he believed the NPA was a
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: dead letter, that he did not review the terms of
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: the agreement or ratify at post Hawk. On the other hand,
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: Deputy Attorney General Philippe told OPR he understood that the
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: NPA was still in effect and that Epstein was trying
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: to undermine the federal jurisdictional basis for the agreement. Apart
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: from addressing Epstein's federalism arguments. However, Deputy Attorney General Philippe
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: did not believe it was the mission of the office
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: of the Deputy Attorney General to review the Epstein case Denovo,
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: to examine the NPA's terms or determine whether the NPA
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: reach of the right balance between state and federal punishment.
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: He told OPR, we heard an appeal. Epstein wanted a
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: meeting to argue for relief. We didn't give him a meeting,
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: and we didn't give him any relief. Deputy Attorney General
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: Philippe told OPR that no one in his office who
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: looked at Epstein's arguments felt that it was sympathetic appeal.
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: In particular, he told OPR that Defense Counsel's argument that
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: there was no basis for a federal prosecution was ludicrous,
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: and the assertion that the usao's investigation of Epstein was
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: politically motivated just seemed unserious. On Monday, June twenty three,
• 15:35
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, Ross sent a brief letter to
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: Starr and Leftkwitz, informing them that the office had completed
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: a thorough review of the usao's handling of the Epstein
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: matter and did not believe intervention by the Deputy Attorney
• 15:48
  Speaker 1: General was warranted in view of the considerable discretion vested
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: by the Department in the US attorneys. He added, even
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: if we were to substitute our judgment for that of
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: the US Attorney, we believe the federal process acution of
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: this case is appropriate. Immediately after receiving a copy of
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: Roth's letter, Villa Fauna notified Defense counsel that Epstein would
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: have until close of business on Monday, June thirtieth, two
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: thousand and eight to comply with the NPA by entering
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: his guilty plea, being sentenced, and surrendering to begin serving
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: his sentence. On June twenty six, two thousand and eight,
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: Roth alerted the Office of the Attorney General that Epstein's
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: counsel might try to contact the Attorney General to request
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: additional review and urge the Attorney General not to take
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: defense Council's calls. Roth told OPR that he was concerned
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: that Epstein's team would try to take further appeal in
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: order to delay resolution in the case. Meanwhile, Starr sent
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: a concluding email to Alcosta, acknowledging that they had reached
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: the end of a long and arduous road and adding,
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: while I am obviously very unhappy at what I believe
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: is the government's treatment of my client, a man whom
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: I have come to deeply admire, I recognize that we
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: have filed and argued are appellate motions and lost. I
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: would like to have some closure with you on this matter,
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: so that in the years to come, neither of us
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: will harbor any will or ill will over this matter.
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: All Right, we're gonna wrap up right there, and in
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: the next episode we're going to pick up with part
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: ten June two thousand and eight through June two thousand
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: and nine. All of the information that goes with this
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box. What's up everyone,
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode,
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: we're getting right back to DOIG report into the Non
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: Prosecution Agreement Part ten. June two thousand and eight through
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: June two thousand and nine. Epstein enters as pleas and
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: serves his custodial sentence. On Friday, June twenty seventh, two
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: thousand and eight, Villa Fauna renewed her request to Epstein's
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: local attorneys, Goldberger and Black, for a copy of this
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: date plea agreement reached with the State Attorney's office, noting
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: that their failure to provide it was a material breach
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: of the NPA. After receiving and reviewing the plea agreement form,
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: which was not yet signed, Villa Fauna sent another other
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: letter to Goldberger and Black informing them that the proposed
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: sentence provision did not comply with the requirements of the NPA. Specifically,
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: as written, the plea agreement called for a sentence of
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: twelve months in the Palm Beach County Detention facility, followed
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: consecutively by eighteen months community control, with a special condition
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: that the defendants served the first six months of community
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: control in the Palm Beach County Detention Facility. Villa Fauna
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: objected to the community control provision, reminding Goldberger and Black
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: that the NPA required Epstein to make a binding recommendation
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: of eighteen months imprisonment, which meant confinement twenty four hours
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: a day at the county jail. In a subsequent email
• 18:41
  Speaker 1: to Sloman, Villa Fauna recounted that she had spoken about
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: the issue with Goldberger, who swore that Epstein would be
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: in custody twenty four hours a day during the community
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: confinement portion of his sentence. Villa Fauna added that Goldberger
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: let it slip that Epstein would not be at the jail,
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: he would be at the stockade. Since we specifically discus
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: this at a meeting with the state attorney months ago,
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: that Epstein would be at the jail, this certainly violates
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: the spirit of the NPA agreement, Villa Fauna told Sloman,
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: something smells very bad. The next day, Villa Fauna asked
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: Goldberger to change the plea agreement by inserting the word
• 19:15
  Speaker 1: imprisoned after six months, and Goldberger agreed to do so. Villafauna, however,
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: did not ask the agreement to be amended to clarify
• 19:23
  Speaker 1: that the reference to the Palm Beach County Detention Facility
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: meant the jail rather than the stockade. The final signed
• 19:30
  Speaker 1: plea agreement form further clarified the sentence, providing that after
• 19:34
  Speaker 1: serving twelve months in the pom Beach County Detention Facility,
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: Epstein would be sentenced to six months in the pom
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: Beach County Detention Facility, to be served consecutive to the
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: twelve month sentence, followed by twelve months community control. The
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: word imprisoned was handwritten after six months, but then crossed
• 19:50
  Speaker 1: out and replaced by jail sentence Part A. June thirtieth,
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight. Epstein enters as guilty pleased in
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: state court. Epstein, with his attorney g At Goldberger, appeared
• 20:01
  Speaker 1: in Palm Beach County Court on June thirtieth, two thousand
• 20:04
  Speaker 1: and eight, and entered guilty pleas to the indictment charging
• 20:07
  Speaker 1: him with one felony account of solicitation a prostitution and
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: to a criminal information charging him with one felony account
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: of procurement of a minor to engage in prostitution. At
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: the plea hearing, which Villafauna and the FBI case agent
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: attended as spectators, Assistant State Attorney Bellohovlk did not profer
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: the facts of the case. Instead, she only recited the
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: charging language and the indictment and the criminal information. Between
• 20:32
  Speaker 1: August first, two thousand and four and October thirty first,
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: two thousand and five, the defendant in Palm Beach County
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: did solicit or procure someone to commit prostitution on three
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: or more occasions, and between August first, two thousand and
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: four and October ninth, two thousand and five, the defendant
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: did procure a minor under the age of eighteen to
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: commit prostitution in Palm Beach County. Also, the Court found
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: this to be sufficient factual basis to support the pleas
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: and engaged in a colloquy with Bellohovely regarding Epstein's victims,
• 21:02
  Speaker 1: the Court are there more than one victim, Miss Bellehovlik,
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: there are several. The Court are all the victims in
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: both the cases in agreement with the terms of the plea.
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: Miss Bellohovlik I have spoken to several myself and I
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: have spoken to Council through Council as to the other victims,
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: and I believe yes, the court and with regard to
• 21:20
  Speaker 1: the victims under age eighteen, is that victim's parents or
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: guardian in agreement with the plea. Miss Bellehovlik. The victim
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: is not under the age of eighteen anymore, and that's
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: why we spoke to Council the court and she's in
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: agreement with the plea. Miss Bellehovelk yes. When the court
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: asked if the plea was in any way tied to
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: any promises or representations by any civil attorneys or other jurisdictions,
• 21:44
  Speaker 1: Goldberger and Bellehovelk, with Epstein present, spoke with the judge
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: at sidebar and disclosed the existence of the confidential non
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: prosecution agreement with the USAO, and the court ordered that
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: a copy of it be filed under seal with the court.
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: After the court accepted Epstein's guilty plea and imposed sentence
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: on him pursue it to the plea agreement, Epstein was
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: taken into custody to begin serving his sentence immediately. In
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: the aftermath of the plea, numerous Individuals familiar with the
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: investigation expressed positive reactions to the outcome, and Villa Fauna
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: received several congratulatory messages. Osterbahn wrote, congratulations, Marie, at long last.
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: Your work on this matter was truly exceptional, and you
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: obtained a very significant result that will serve the victims well.
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: One senior colleague who was familiar with the case noted
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: the case only resolved with the filthy, rich, bad guy
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: going to jail because of your dedication and determination. Another wrote,
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: if it had not been for you, he would have
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: gotten away with it. The CEO's trial attorney, who worked
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: briefly with Villa Fana, told her, but for your tenacity,
• 22:47
  Speaker 1: he'd be somewhere ruining another child's life. One victim's attorney stated,
• 22:51
  Speaker 1: great job of not letting this guy off the hook.
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: But Villa Fauna was not satisfied with the outcome, responding
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: to one colleague, after all the hell they put me through,
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: I don't feel like celebrating eighteen months. He should be
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: spending eighteen years in jail. Acosta later publicly stated that
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: the FBI Special Agent in charge called them to offer
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: congratulations and to praise prosecutors for holding firm against the
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: attorneys that Epstein brought on. In the same later public statement,
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: Acosta noted that he received communications from Dershowitz, Star and Leftkwitz,
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: who all sought to make peace with them. A Costa
• 23:25
  Speaker 1: referred to it as a proud moment. On July seventh,
• 23:28
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, and Epstein victim filed an emergency
• 23:31
  Speaker 1: petition against the department in federal court in Miami, alleging
• 23:35
  Speaker 1: a violation of her rights under the CVRA. A second
• 23:38
  Speaker 1: victim joined the petition soon thereafter. The History of the
• 23:41
  Speaker 1: litigation and issues relating to it are discussed in Chapter
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: three of this report. B Epstein is placed on work
• 23:49
  Speaker 1: release a few days after Epstein's guilty plea, Villa Fauna
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: reported to Sloman that Epstein was incarcerated at the low
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: security stockade, rather than the main detention center, where a
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: county print listeners were usually housed. She also told Sloman that,
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: according to the Sheriff's office, Epstein was eligible for work release.
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: Although the USAO had made clear that it expected Epstein
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: to be incarcerated twenty four hours a day, every day,
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: the subject of the work release had not been addressed explicitly.
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: During the NPA negotiations, and the NPA itself was silent
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: on the issue. Epstein's acceptance into the work release program
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: as a convicted sexual offender was seen by many as
• 24:28
  Speaker 1: another special benefit given to Epstein. Because the decision to
• 24:32
  Speaker 1: allow Epstein into the work release program was made by
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office, OPR did not investigate whether
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: any state, county or sheriff office rules were violated. OPR
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: did examine the usao's consideration of work release prior to
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: signing the NPA and its subsequent unsuccessful efforts to ensure
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: that Epstein remained incarcerated twenty four hours a day. The
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: first specific reference to work release was made weeks after
• 24:58
  Speaker 1: the NPA was signed, when left Kwitz asserted in his
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: October twenty three, two thousand seven, letter to Acosta that
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: so long as mister Epstein's sentence does not explicitly violate
• 25:07
  Speaker 1: the terms of the NPA, he's entitled to any type
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: of sentence available to him, including, but not limited to
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: gain time and work release. In November two thousand and seven,
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: Slowman had an exchange of letters with left Kwitz about
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: the usao's understanding that Epstein had agreed to serve as
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: full jail term in continuous confinement. Pointing out that the
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: NPA clearly indicates that mister Epstein is to be incarcerated.
• 25:31
  Speaker 1: Sloman noted the Florida Department of Corrections rules did not
• 25:34
  Speaker 1: allow individuals registered as sexual offenders to participate in work release,
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: and thus Epstein would not be eligible for work release program.
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: Sloman concluded that the USAO is putting you on notice
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: that it intends to make certain that mister Epstein is
• 25:48
  Speaker 1: treated no better and no worse than anyone else convicted
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: of the same offense, and that if Epstein were to
• 25:54
  Speaker 1: be granted work release, the USAO would investigate the reasons
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: why an exception was granted in mister Epstein's case. However,
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: also in November, State attorney Krisher told Sloman that Epstein
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: was in fact eligible to petition for work release because
• 26:09
  Speaker 1: the sexual offender registration would not take place until after
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: Epstein completed the sentence, but that Krisher would oppose such
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: a petition if it's in the agreement. On November sixteenth,
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, the case agents met with Bellehovlk
• 26:23
  Speaker 1: and asked if the State Attorney's office would oppose a
• 26:25
  Speaker 1: request that Epstein be granted work release. Bellohovlk was noncommittal,
• 26:30
  Speaker 1: and when the agents asked what she included language in
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: the state's plea agreement prohibiting Epstein from participating in work release,
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: she responded that she would have to discuss the issue
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: with the state attorney. Krisher later told OPR that work
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: release was within the control of the Sheriff's office, not
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: my office. The state's plea agreement with Epstein did not
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: address the issue of work release. The day after Epstein
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: entered his June thirtieth, two thousand and eight, plea, Villa
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: Fauna and her immediate supervisor and met with Pombe Sheriff's
• 26:58
  Speaker 1: Office officials today discuss work release. According to Villa Fauna,
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: the official told them Epstein would be eligible for work
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: release and will be placed on work release, a statement
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: that contradicted the information the case agents had been given
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: by the jail supervisor the previous November, as well as
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: statements made by the defense attorney Jack Goldberger to Villa
• 27:18
  Speaker 1: Fauna just days before the plea was entered, when he
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: specifically told Villa Fauna that Epstein would not get work release.
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna alerted the Sheriff's Office official that although Epstein
• 27:29
  Speaker 1: told the court during his plea proceeding that he had
• 27:32
  Speaker 1: worked every day for a couple of years at the
• 27:34
  Speaker 1: Florida Science Foundation, that entity did not even exist until
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: November two thousand and seven. Moreover, the address Epstein provided
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: to the court for the Florida Science Foundation was the
• 27:44
  Speaker 1: office of Epstein's attorney, Jack Goldberger. Villa Fauna and her
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: supervisor asked the Sheriff's Office notify the USAO if Epstein
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: applied for work release. Acosta told OPR that he was
• 27:56
  Speaker 1: aware of Villa Fauna was trying to ensure that Epstein
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: did not get work release, and he would not have
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: contradicted or efforts. Acosta explained that the USAO expected Epstein
• 28:05
  Speaker 1: would be treated like everyone else, but that, as shown
• 28:09
  Speaker 1: by our subsequent communications with the State Attorney's Office, having
• 28:12
  Speaker 1: Epstein on work release was not what our office envisioned.
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: All Right, we're gonna wrap up right here, and in
• 28:18
  Speaker 1: the next episode, we're going to pick up where we
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: left off. All of the information that goes with this
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box. What's Up everyone,
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode,
• 28:30
  Speaker 1: we're going to get back to the OIG report into
• 28:33
  Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein's non prosecution agreement. In August two thousand and eight,
• 28:37
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna spoke with defense attorney Black about ensuring Epstein's
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: compliance with the NPA and raise the issue of work release.
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna later reported to Acosta and Slowman that Black
• 28:49
  Speaker 1: assured her that he had reminded the team that eighteen
• 28:51
  Speaker 1: months in jail is a material term of the agreement.
• 28:54
  Speaker 1: The USAO never received notice of Epstein's work release application.
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: On October tix, two thousand and eight, less than three
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: and a half months after Epstein entered his guilty plea,
• 29:04
  Speaker 1: the Pombeach Sheriff's Office placed him into the work release program,
• 29:08
  Speaker 1: permitting him to leave the stockade for up to twelve
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: hours per day, six days per week to work at
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: the Florida Science Foundation office in West Palm Beach. In
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: mid November two thousand and eight, Villa Fauna learned that
• 29:20
  Speaker 1: Epstein was on work release. She notified Acosta, Sloman, and
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: the USAO Criminal Division Chief of this development in an
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: email and asked can I indict him now. On November
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: twenty fourth, two thousand and eight, Villa Fauna sent Defense
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: Attorney Black a letter notifying him that the USAO believed
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: Epstein's application to in participation in the work release program
• 29:41
  Speaker 1: constituted a material breach of the NPA. Villa Fauna reminded
• 29:45
  Speaker 1: Black that she had more than a dozen emails expressing
• 29:48
  Speaker 1: the usao's insistence that Epstein be incarcerated for eighteen months,
• 29:53
  Speaker 1: and that her June twenty seventh, two thousand and eight
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: letter to Council made it clear that this meant confinement
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: for twenty four hours a day. Villafanna noted that Goldberger
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: had not inserted the word imprisoned into the plea agreement,
• 30:05
  Speaker 1: as he agreed to, but instead inserted the term jail sentence.
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna told Council the usao's agreement not to prosecute
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: mister Epstein was based upon its determination that eighteen months
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: incarceration confinement twenty four hours a day was sufficient to
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: satisfy the federal interest in mister Epstein's crimes. Accordingly, the
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: US Attorney's Office hereby gives notice that mister Epstein has
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: violated the NPA by failing to remain incarcerated twenty four
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: hours a day for the eighteen month term of imprisonment.
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: The United States will exercise any and all rights it
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: has under the NPA unless mister Epstein immediately ceases and
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: desists from his breach of this agreement. According to Villa Fauna,
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: the FBI case agent spoke with the stockade's work release
• 30:49
  Speaker 1: coordinator and reported back that the work release coordinator told
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: her he had been led to believe the government knew
• 30:54
  Speaker 1: Epstein had applied for the program, and that he had
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: been threatened with legal action if he did not allow
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: Epstein to participate in work release. On November twenty sixth,
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, the USAO advised the department that
• 31:07
  Speaker 1: Acosta was recused from all matters involving the law firm
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: of Kirkland Nellis, which was still heavily involved in the
• 31:14
  Speaker 1: Epstein case, because Acosta was discussing with the firm the
• 31:17
  Speaker 1: possibility of employment. As a result, Slowman became the senior
• 31:21
  Speaker 1: USAO official responsible for making final decisions related to Epstein.
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: Also on November twenty six, two thousand and eight, Black
• 31:29
  Speaker 1: responded to Villa Fauna's letter acknowledging that Epstein was serving
• 31:32
  Speaker 1: his sentence in the Palm Beach County work release program,
• 31:35
  Speaker 1: but denying that Epstein was in breach of the NPA.
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: Black noted that the NPA did not prohibit work release.
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: The NPA expressly provided that Epstein was to be afforded
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: the same benefits as any other inmate. Florida law treated
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: work release as part of confinement, and the Palm Beach
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: County Sheriff's Office had discretion to grant work release to
• 31:55
  Speaker 1: any inmate. Black also claimed that Acosta recognized that mister
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: Epstein might serve portion of his sentence through the work
• 32:01
  Speaker 1: release program, and pointed out that the December sixth, two
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: thousand and seven draft victim notification letter sent to Lefkowitz
• 32:08
  Speaker 1: for review specifically referred to the victim's rights to be
• 32:11
  Speaker 1: notified if Epstein is allowed to participate in a work
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: release program. On December third, two thousand and eight, in
• 32:18
  Speaker 1: advance of a scheduled meeting with Black, Villafanas and Sloman
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: and Criminal Division Chiefs Senior and Email about Epstein's participation
• 32:26
  Speaker 1: in the work release program. It appears that since day one,
• 32:29
  Speaker 1: Goldberger and Krisher have been scheming to get Epstein out
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: on work release. For example, the indictment incorrectly charges Epstein
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: for an offense that would have made him ineligible for
• 32:39
  Speaker 1: work release if it had been charged correctly. Remember that
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: Krisher also went along with letting us believe that Epstein
• 32:45
  Speaker 1: was pleading to a registrable offense when Epstein's folks and
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: Krisher believed that the offense was not registrable. Krisher and
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: Goldberger also told us that Epstein would be housed in
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: the Palm Beach County Jail, not the stockade, but he
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: would not have been eligible bull for work release at
• 33:01
  Speaker 1: the jail. As part of his work release, Epstein has
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: hired off duty sheriff's deputies to provide him with protection.
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: It appears that he is paying between three thousand and
• 33:10
  Speaker 1: forty one hundred per week for this service, despite the
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: work release rules barring anyone from the Sheriff's office and
• 33:16
  Speaker 1: Sheriff's office itself from having any business transactions with inmates
• 33:20
  Speaker 1: while they are in the custody or supervision of the sheriff.
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna added that she and her immediate supervisor believed
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: that the USAO should not budge on the twenty four
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: hour a day incarceration requirement. Referring to the CVRA litigation,
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna also pointed out that two victims had brought
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: suit against the USAO for failing to keep them informed
• 33:40
  Speaker 1: about the investigation, and the office had no obligation to
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: inform all the victims. Upon Epstein's release. On December eleventh,
• 33:48
  Speaker 1: two thousand and eight, Villa Fauna wrote the Corrections Division
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: of Upon Beach County Sheriff's Office to express the usao's
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: view that Epstein was not eligible for work release and
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: to alert the Sheriff's office that Epstein's work release application
• 34:01
  Speaker 1: contained several inaccuracies and omitted relevant information. Villa Fauna pointed
• 34:06
  Speaker 1: out that Epstein's application identified his place of employment as
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: the Florida Science Foundation, and the telephone number listed in
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: the application for the Florida Science Foundation was the telephone
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: number to the law firm of Epstein's attorney, Jack Goldberger.
• 34:20
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna also noted that the individual identified in the
• 34:23
  Speaker 1: work release file as Epstein's supervisor at the Florida Science
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: Foundation had submitted publicly available sworn filings to the Internal
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: Revenue service, indicating that Epstein worked only one hour per
• 34:35
  Speaker 1: week and earned no compensation, but that same individual had
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: represented to the Sheriff's office that Epstein's duties required him
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: to work six days a week for twelve hours per day. Finally,
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna pointed out that Epstein's purported supervisor, who as
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: the foundation's vice president, was subordinate to Epstein. The foundation's
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: president had promised to alert the Sheriff's office at Epstein
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: failed to comply with his work schedule, but the supervisor
• 35:00
  Speaker 1: lived and worked in New York and was unable to
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: monitor Epstein's activities on a day to day basis. The
• 35:06
  Speaker 1: Sheriff's office neither acknowledged nor responded to Villafana's letter. In
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: March two thousand and nine, Slowman met in Miami with
• 35:13
  Speaker 1: Dershowitz for, as Dershowitz characterized it, a subsequent email or
• 35:17
  Speaker 1: relaxed drink and conversation, and included a discussion about the
• 35:21
  Speaker 1: Epstein case. After that encounter, Dershowitz emailed Slowman expressing appreciation
• 35:26
  Speaker 1: for Slowman's assurances that the FEDS will not interfere with
• 35:30
  Speaker 1: how Pombeach Sheriff administers Epstein's sentence as long as he's
• 35:34
  Speaker 1: treated like any similarly situated inmate. Sloman responded, regarding mister Epstein,
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: the United States Attorney's Office will not interfere without the
• 35:43
  Speaker 1: Pombeach Sheriff's Office administers the sentence imposed by the court.
• 35:46
  Speaker 1: That being said, this does not mean that the USAO
• 35:49
  Speaker 1: condones or encourages the PbSO to mitigate the terms and
• 35:53
  Speaker 1: conditions of his sentence. Furthermore, it does not mean that
• 35:56
  Speaker 1: if contacted for our position concerning alternative custody or in
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: home detention, we would not object. To be clear, if contacted,
• 36:04
  Speaker 1: we will object naturally. I also expect that no one
• 36:08
  Speaker 1: on behalf of mister Epstein will use my assurance to
• 36:11
  Speaker 1: you to affirmatively represent the PbSO that the USAO does
• 36:15
  Speaker 1: not object to an alternative custody or home detention. A
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: week later, Dershowitz emailed Sloman again, this time expressing appreciation
• 36:24
  Speaker 1: for Sloman's willingness to call the sheriff and advise him
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: that your office would take no position on how he
• 36:29
  Speaker 1: handled Epstein's sentence as long as Epstein did not receive
• 36:32
  Speaker 1: special treatment, but adding, let's put any call off for
• 36:35
  Speaker 1: a while. Epstein's sentence required that he be confined to
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: his home for a twelve month period following his release
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: from prison. On July twenty second, two thousand and nine,
• 36:45
  Speaker 1: almost thirteen months after we began serving a sentence, Epstein
• 36:48
  Speaker 1: was released from the stockade and placed on home confinement.
• 36:52
  Speaker 1: At this time, he registered as a sexual offender. Nine
• 36:55
  Speaker 1: post release developments in the summer of two thousand and nine,
• 36:59
  Speaker 1: allegations sir that Epstein had cooperated with the US Attorney's
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: Office for the Eastern District of New York's investigation of
• 37:06
  Speaker 1: investment bank bear Stearns, and that he had been released
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: early from his eighteen month imprisonment term because of that.
• 37:12
  Speaker 1: When Villa Fauna spoke with attorneys in the Eastern District
• 37:15
  Speaker 1: of New York, however, an ausa told Villa Fauna that
• 37:19
  Speaker 1: they never heard of Epstein and that he had not
• 37:21
  Speaker 1: cooperated with the bear Stearns case. During her OPR interview,
• 37:24
  Speaker 1: Villa Fauna told OPR that, to her knowledge, the rumor
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: of Epstein's cooperation was completely false. Villa Fauna and the
• 37:32
  Speaker 1: USAO continued to monitor Epstein's compliance with the terms of
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: the NPA. In August two thousand and nine, Villa Fauna
• 37:38
  Speaker 1: alerted her supervisors that Epstein was an apparent violation of
• 37:42
  Speaker 1: his home detention. He had been spotted walking on the beach,
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: and when stopped by the police, he claimed that he
• 37:47
  Speaker 1: was walking to work at an office nearly eight miles
• 37:50
  Speaker 1: from his home. Villa Fauna passed this information along to
• 37:53
  Speaker 1: the Palm Beach County Probation Office. By letter dated September one,
• 37:57
  Speaker 1: two thousand and nine, Black wrote to Sloman seeking the
• 37:59
  Speaker 1: u usao's agreement transfer supervision of the community control phase
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: of epstein sentence to the US Virgin Islands, where Epstein
• 38:07
  Speaker 1: maintained its primary residence. In response, Villa Fauna notified Black
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: that the USAO opposed such a request and would view
• 38:15
  Speaker 1: it as a violation of the NPA. Three months later,
• 38:18
  Speaker 1: Slowman met with Dershowitz and, among other issues, informed them
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: that the USAO opposed early termination of Epstein's community control
• 38:26
  Speaker 1: supervision and would object to request to transfer epstein supervision
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: to the US Virgin Islands. After serving his year in
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: home detention in Florida, Epstein completed his sentence on July
• 38:37
  Speaker 1: twenty first, twenty ten. All right, we're going to wrap
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: up here and in the next episode we're going to
• 38:42
  Speaker 1: pick up with Chapter two, Part two, Applicable Standards. All
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: of the information that goes with this episode can be
• 38:49
  Speaker 1: found in the description box. What's up everyone, and welcome
• 38:53
  Speaker 1: back to the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're getting
• 38:56
  Speaker 1: back to the OIG report into Jeffrey Epstein's non pro
• 39:00
  Speaker 1: secution Agreement. Chapter two, Part two Applicable Standards one opr's
• 39:06
  Speaker 1: analytical framework. OPR finds professional misconduct when an attorney intentionally
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: violates or acts in reckless disregard of a known unambiguous
• 39:16
  Speaker 1: obligation imposed by law, rule of professional conduct, or department
• 39:20
  Speaker 1: regulation or policy. In determining whether an attorney has engaged
• 39:25
  Speaker 1: in a professional misconduct, OPR uses the preponderance of the
• 39:29
  Speaker 1: evidence standard to make factual findings. An attorney intentionally violates
• 39:33
  Speaker 1: an obligation standard when the attorney one engages in conduct
• 39:37
  Speaker 1: with the purpose of obtaining a result that the obligation
• 39:40
  Speaker 1: or standard unambiguously prohibits, or two engages in conduct knowing
• 39:45
  Speaker 1: its natural or probable consequence, and that the consequence is
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: a result that the obligation or standard unambiguously prohibits. An
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: attorney acts in reckless disregard of an obligation or standard
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: when one, the attorney knows or should know, based on
• 40:00
  Speaker 1: his or her experience, that the unambiguous nature of the
• 40:03
  Speaker 1: obligation or standard of an obligation or standard. Two, the
• 40:06
  Speaker 1: attorney knows or should know based on his or her
• 40:09
  Speaker 1: experience and the unambiguous applicability of the obligation of standard,
• 40:13
  Speaker 1: that the attorney's conduct involves a substantial likelihood that he
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: or she will violate or cause a violation of the
• 40:20
  Speaker 1: obligation or standard. And three, the attorney nonetheless engages in
• 40:25
  Speaker 1: the conduct which is objectively unreasonable under all the circumstances. Thus,
• 40:30
  Speaker 1: an attorney's disregard for an obligation is reckless when it
• 40:34
  Speaker 1: represents a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: an objectively reasonable attorney would observe in the same situation.
• 40:41
  Speaker 1: If OPR determines that an attorney did not engage in
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: professional misconduct, OPR determines whether the attorney exercised poor judgment,
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: engaged in other inappropriate conduct, made a mistake, or acted
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: appropriately under all the circumstances. An attorney exercises poor judgment
• 40:58
  Speaker 1: when faced with alternative core of action, he or she
• 41:01
  Speaker 1: chooses a course of action that is in marked contrast
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: to the action that the department may reasonably expect. An
• 41:07
  Speaker 1: attorney exercising good judgment take poor judgment differs from professional
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: misconduct in that an attorney may act inappropriately and thus
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: exhibit poor judgment, even though he or she may not
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: have violated or acted in reckless disregard of a clear
• 41:22
  Speaker 1: obligation or standard. In addition, an attorney may exhibit poor
• 41:26
  Speaker 1: judgment even though an obligation or standard at issue is
• 41:29
  Speaker 1: not sufficiently clear and unambiguous to support a professional misconduct finding.
• 41:34
  Speaker 1: A mistake, on the other hand, results from an inexcusable
• 41:37
  Speaker 1: human error despite an attorney's exercise of reasonable care under
• 41:42
  Speaker 1: the circumstances. An attorney who makes a good faith attempt
• 41:46
  Speaker 1: to ascertain the obligation in standards imposed on the attorney
• 41:50
  Speaker 1: and to comply with them in a given situation does
• 41:53
  Speaker 1: not commit professional misconduct. Evidence that an attorney made a
• 41:56
  Speaker 1: good faith attempt to ascertain and comply with the obligations
• 42:00
  Speaker 1: standards consulted with a supervisor or ethics advisor, notified the
• 42:04
  Speaker 1: tribunal or the attorney representing a party or person with
• 42:08
  Speaker 1: adverse interests of an intended course of conduct, or took
• 42:11
  Speaker 1: affirmative steps the attorney reasonably believed were required to comply
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: with an obligation or standard. Two applicable standards of conduct
• 42:21
  Speaker 1: a the United States Attorney's Manual. Among its many provisions,
• 42:25
  Speaker 1: United States Attorney Manual includes general statements of principles that
• 42:29
  Speaker 1: summarize appropriate considerations to be weighed and desirable practices to
• 42:33
  Speaker 1: be followed by federal prosecutors when discharging their prosecutorial responsibilities.
• 42:39
  Speaker 1: The goal of USAM is to promote the reasoned exercise
• 42:42
  Speaker 1: of prosecutorial authority and contribute to the fair, even handed
• 42:46
  Speaker 1: administration of the federal criminal laws, and to promote public
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: confidence that important prosecutorial decisions will be made rationally and
• 42:55
  Speaker 1: objectively on the merits of each case. U SAM Section
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: nine dashed twenty seven dot zero zero one. Because the
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: USAM is designed to assist in structuring the decision making
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: process of government attorneys, many of its principles are cast
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: in general terms, with a view providing guidance rather than
• 43:12
  Speaker 1: mandating results. See also U SAM Section nine Dash twenty
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: seven dot one twenty comment. It is expected that each
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: federal prosecutor will be guided by these principles in carrying
• 43:23
  Speaker 1: out his or her criminal law enforcement responsibilities. However, it
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: is not intended that reference to these principles will require
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: a particular prosecutorial decision in any given case. U SAM
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: Section nine Dash twenty seven dot one ten comment. Under
• 43:38
  Speaker 1: federal law criminal justice system, the prosecutor has wide latitude
• 43:42
  Speaker 1: in determining when, whom, how, and even whether to prosecute
• 43:46
  Speaker 1: for apparent violation of federal criminal law. However, USAM Section
• 43:50
  Speaker 1: nine twenty seven dot one thirty provides that a usas
• 43:54
  Speaker 1: who depart from the principles of federal prosecution articulated in
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: the u SAM may be subject to internal discipline. In particular,
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: USAM Section nine Dash twenty seven dot one thirty states
• 44:06
  Speaker 1: that each US attorney should establish internal office procedures to
• 44:10
  Speaker 1: ensure that prosecutorial decisions are made at an appropriate level
• 44:13
  Speaker 1: of responsibility and are consistent with the principles set forth
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: in USAM, and that serious unjustified departures from the principles
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: set forth in USAM are followed by remedial action, including
• 44:25
  Speaker 1: the imposition of disciplinary sanction, when warranted and deemed appropriate.
• 44:30
  Speaker 1: US attorneys have plenty authority with regard to federal criminal matters,
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: and may modify or depart from the principles set forth
• 44:37
  Speaker 1: in USAM as deemed necessary in the interest of fair
• 44:40
  Speaker 1: and effect of law enforcement within their individual judicial districts.
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: USAM Section nine Dash two dot zero zero one nine
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: dot two seven dash one forty. The USAM provisions are
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: supplemented by the Department's Criminal Resource Manual, which provides additional
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: guidance relating to the conduct of federal criminal prosecute US
• 45:00
  Speaker 1: one u SAM provisions relating to the initiation and declination
• 45:05
  Speaker 1: of a federal prosecution. Federal prosecutors do not open a
• 45:09
  Speaker 1: case on every matter referred to them. U SAM Section
• 45:12
  Speaker 1: nine Dash two dot zero two zero explicitly authorizes a
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: US attorney to decline prosecution in any case referred directly
• 45:21
  Speaker 1: to him or her by an agency, unless a statute
• 45:24
  Speaker 1: provides otherwise. Whenever a US attorney closes a case without prosecution,
• 45:29
  Speaker 1: the file should reflect the action taken and the reason
• 45:32
  Speaker 1: for it. U SAM Section nine Dash twenty seven dot
• 45:35
  Speaker 1: two twenty sets forth the grounds to be considered in
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: making the decision whether to commence or decline federal prosecution.
• 45:42
  Speaker 1: A federal prosecutor should commence or recommend prosecution if he
• 45:46
  Speaker 1: or she believes that admissible evidence will probably be sufficient
• 45:50
  Speaker 1: to obtain and sustain a conviction of a federal offense,
• 45:53
  Speaker 1: unless one, the prosecution would serve no federal interest to
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: the person is subject to effect a prosecution in another jurisdiction,
• 46:01
  Speaker 1: or three there exists an adequate alternative to prosecution. A
• 46:05
  Speaker 1: comment to this provision indicates that it is the prosecutor's
• 46:09
  Speaker 1: task to determine whether these circumstances exist, and in making
• 46:13
  Speaker 1: the determination, the prosecutor should consult you SAM Section nine
• 46:17
  Speaker 1: Dash twenty seven dot two thirty nine Dash twenty seven
• 46:20
  Speaker 1: dot two forty or nine Dash twenty seven dot two
• 46:23
  Speaker 1: fifty as appropriate you SAM. Section nine Dash twenty seven
• 46:27
  Speaker 1: dot two three zero sets forth a non exhaustive list
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: of considerations that a federal prosecutor should weigh in determining
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: whether a substantial federal interest would be served by initiating
• 46:38
  Speaker 1: prosecution against a person. One federal law enforcement priorities. Two
• 46:44
  Speaker 1: the nature and seriousness of the offense, three the determin
• 46:47
  Speaker 1: effect of prosecution. Four the person's culpability in connection with
• 46:51
  Speaker 1: the offense. Five the person's history with the respect to
• 46:54
  Speaker 1: the criminal activity, six the person's willingness to cooperate in
• 46:57
  Speaker 1: the investigation or prosecution of others, and seven the probable
• 47:01
  Speaker 1: sentence or other consequences if the person is convicted. The
• 47:06
  Speaker 1: USAM contemplates that, on occasion, a federal prosecutor will decline
• 47:10
  Speaker 1: to open a case in deference to prosecution by the
• 47:13
  Speaker 1: state in which the crime occurred. USAM Section nine to
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: twenty seven dot two forty directs that in evaluating the
• 47:20
  Speaker 1: effectiveness of prosecution and another jurisdiction, the federal prosecutor should
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: weigh all relevant considerations, including the strength of the other
• 47:28
  Speaker 1: jurisdiction's interest in prosecution, the other jurisdiction's ability and willingness
• 47:32
  Speaker 1: to prosecute effectively, and the probable sentence or other consequences
• 47:37
  Speaker 1: the person will be subject to if convicted in the
• 47:40
  Speaker 1: other jurisdiction. A comment to this provision explains some offenses,
• 47:44
  Speaker 1: even though in violation of federal law, are of particularly
• 47:48
  Speaker 1: strong interest to the authorities of the state or local
• 47:51
  Speaker 1: jurisdiction in which that they occurred, either because of the
• 47:54
  Speaker 1: nature of the offense, the identity of the offender or victim,
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: the fact that the investigation was conducted primarily by state
• 48:01
  Speaker 1: or local investigators, or some other circumstance. Whatever the reason,
• 48:06
  Speaker 1: when it appears that federal interest in prosecution is less
• 48:09
  Speaker 1: substantial than the interest of state or local authorities, consideration
• 48:13
  Speaker 1: should be given to referring the case to those authorities,
• 48:17
  Speaker 1: rather than commencing or recommending a federal prosecution. Another comment
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: cautions that in assessing whether to defer to state or
• 48:25
  Speaker 1: local authorities, the federal prosecutors should be alert to any
• 48:28
  Speaker 1: local conditions, attitudes, relationships, or other circumstances that might cast
• 48:33
  Speaker 1: doubt on the likelihood of the state or local authorities
• 48:36
  Speaker 1: conducting a thorough and successful prosecution. USAM Section nine twenty
• 48:41
  Speaker 1: seven dot two sixty. This statute identifies in permissible considerations
• 48:46
  Speaker 1: relating to the decision whether to initiate or decline a
• 48:49
  Speaker 1: federal prosecution. Specifically, the decision may not be based on
• 48:53
  Speaker 1: consideration of the person's race, religion, sex, national origin, or
• 48:57
  Speaker 1: political association, activities, beliefs, the prosecutor's own personal feelings about
• 49:03
  Speaker 1: the person or the victim, or the possible effect of
• 49:06
  Speaker 1: the decision on the prosecutor's own professional or personal circumstances.
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: When opting to decline federal prosecution, the prosecutor should ensure
• 49:14
  Speaker 1: that the reasons for that decision are communicated to the
• 49:17
  Speaker 1: investigating agency and reflected in the office files. U SAM.
• 49:22
  Speaker 1: Section nine Dash twenty seven dot two seventy two U SAM.
• 49:26
  Speaker 1: Section nine Dash two dot zero three to one. The
• 49:29
  Speaker 1: Petite Policy. Although the Constitution does not prohibit prosecutions of
• 49:33
  Speaker 1: a defendant by both state and federal authorities even when
• 49:36
  Speaker 1: the conduct charge is identical in both charging jurisdictions, the
• 49:40
  Speaker 1: Department has a long standing policy known as the Petite Policy,
• 49:43
  Speaker 1: governing federal prosecutions charged after the initiation of prosecution and
• 49:47
  Speaker 1: another jurisdiction based on the same or similar conduct. The
• 49:51
  Speaker 1: general principles applicable to the prosecution or declination decision are
• 49:55
  Speaker 1: set forth in U SAM. Section nine Dash two dot
• 49:58
  Speaker 1: zero three one. Dual and Successive Prosecution Policy Petite Policy,
• 50:03
  Speaker 1: which contains guidelines for a federal prosecutor's exercise of discretion
• 50:07
  Speaker 1: in determining whether to bring a federal prosecution based on
• 50:10
  Speaker 1: the substantiality same act or transaction involving in a prior
• 50:14
  Speaker 1: state or federal proceeding. The policy applies whenever there has
• 50:17
  Speaker 1: been a prior state or federal prosecution resulting in an acquittal,
• 50:21
  Speaker 1: a conviction, including one resulting from a plea agreement, or
• 50:24
  Speaker 1: a dismissal or other termination of merits after jeopardy has attached.
• 50:29
  Speaker 1: In circumstances in which the policy applies, a prosecutor nonetheless
• 50:32
  Speaker 1: can initiate a new federal prosecution when three substantative prerequisites exist.
• 50:38
  Speaker 1: The prerequisites or as follows, One, the matter must involve
• 50:41
  Speaker 1: a substantial federal interest. The determination whether a substantial federal
• 50:45
  Speaker 1: interest is involved is made by a case by case basis.
• 50:49
  Speaker 1: Matters that come within the National Investigation and Prosecution priorities
• 50:52
  Speaker 1: established by the Department are more likely to satisfy this
• 50:56
  Speaker 1: requirement than other matters. Two, the prior prosecution must have
• 51:00
  Speaker 1: left the substantial federal interest demonstrably unvindicated. In general, the
• 51:05
  Speaker 1: Department presumes that a prior prosecution has vindicated federal interests,
• 51:10
  Speaker 1: but that presumption may be overcome in certain circumstances. As
• 51:13
  Speaker 1: relevant here. The presumption may be overcome when the choice
• 51:17
  Speaker 1: of charge in the prior prosecution was based on factors
• 51:20
  Speaker 1: such as incompetence, corruption, intimidation, or undue influence. The presumption
• 51:25
  Speaker 1: may be overcome even when the prior prosecution resulted in
• 51:28
  Speaker 1: a conviction, if the prior sentence was manifestly inadequate in
• 51:32
  Speaker 1: light of the federal interest involved in a substantially enhanced sentence,
• 51:36
  Speaker 1: including forfeiture and restitution as well as imprisonment and fines,
• 51:40
  Speaker 1: is available through the contemplated federal prosecution. Three, the government
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: must believe that the defendant's conduct constitutes a federal offense
• 51:49
  Speaker 1: and that the admissible evidence probably will be sufficient to
• 51:52
  Speaker 1: obtain and sustain a conviction. However, the satisfaction of the
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: prerequisite does not require a prosecutor to proceed with a
• 51:59
  Speaker 1: federal investigation or charges, nor is the department required to
• 52:03
  Speaker 1: approve the proposed prosecution. The Batite policy cautions at whatever
• 52:08
  Speaker 1: a matter involves overlapping federal and state jurisdiction, federal prosecutors
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: should consult with their state counterparts to determine the most
• 52:16
  Speaker 1: appropriate single forum in which to proceed to satisfy the
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: substantial federal and state interests involved. If a substantial question
• 52:24
  Speaker 1: arises as to whether the petite policy applies to a
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: particular prosecution, the prosecutor should submit the matter to the
• 52:31
  Speaker 1: appropriate Assistant Attorney General for resolution. Prior approval from the
• 52:35
  Speaker 1: appropriate Assistant Attorney General must be obtained before bringing a
• 52:38
  Speaker 1: prosecution governed by this policy. All right, folks, we're going
• 52:42
  Speaker 1: to wrap up there, and in the next episode we're
• 52:44
  Speaker 1: going to pick up with Part three, use SAM provisions
• 52:46
  Speaker 1: relating to plea agreements. All of the information that goes
• 52:50
  Speaker 1: with this episode can be found in the description box.