Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Mega Edition: The OIG Report Detailing The Investigation Into Epstein's NPA (Part 11-15) (7/21/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: The OIG Report Detailing The Investigation Into Epstein's NPA (Part 11-15) (7/21/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

0:00
Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the program. This episode,
0:04
Speaker 1: we're picking up where we left off with the OIG
0:06
Speaker 1: report into Jeffrey Epstein's non prosecution agreement one Acosta's explanation
0:13
Speaker 1: for his decision to pursue a state based resolution. Subsequent
0:17
Speaker 1: events showed that the decision to resolve the case through
0:20
Speaker 1: state charges was pivotal, and OPR extensively questioned the Costa
0:25
Speaker 1: about his reasoning. In his OPR interview, Acosta explained the
0:29
Speaker 1: various factors that influenced his decision to pursue a state
0:32
Speaker 1: based resolution. Acosta said that although he, Sloman and Menchell
0:37
Speaker 1: believed the victims and believed Epstein did what he did,
0:40
Speaker 1: they were concerned about some of the legal issues and
0:43
Speaker 1: some of the issues in terms of testimony. Acosta also
0:47
Speaker 1: recalled discussions with the senior team about how the victims
0:51
Speaker 1: would do on the stand. Acosta told OPR that from
0:55
Speaker 1: the earliest point in the investigation, he considered whether because
0:59
Speaker 1: the state had indicted the case, the USAO should pursue it.
1:03
Speaker 1: The prosecution was going forward on the part of the state,
1:06
Speaker 1: and so here is the big bad federal government stepping
1:09
Speaker 1: on a sovereign state saying you're not doing enough, when,
1:13
Speaker 1: in my mind, the whole idea of the petit policy
1:16
Speaker 1: is to recognize that the state is an independent entity
1:19
Speaker 1: and that we should presume that what they're doing is correct,
1:23
Speaker 1: even if we don't like the outcome. Except in the
1:25
Speaker 1: most unusual of circumstances. Acosta told OPR that absent USAO intervention,
1:32
Speaker 1: the state's prosecution of Epstein would have become final, and
1:35
Speaker 1: accordingly it was prudent to employ petit policy analysis. As
1:40
Speaker 1: Acosta explained in a public statement he issued in twenty eleven,
1:44
Speaker 1: the federal responsibility in this unique situation was merely to
1:48
Speaker 1: serve as a backstop to state authorities to ensure that
1:51
Speaker 1: there was no miscarriage of justice. Furthermore, Acosta saw a
1:55
Speaker 1: distinction between a case that originated as a federal investigation
1:59
Speaker 1: and one that had already been indicted by the state
2:02
Speaker 1: but was brought to the federal government because of a
2:05
Speaker 1: perception that the state charge was inadequate. In the latter circumstance,
2:09
Speaker 1: Acosta viewed the usao's role only as preventing a manifest injustice.
2:15
Speaker 1: A Costa explained that no jail time would have been
2:18
Speaker 1: a manifest injustice, but it was his understanding that if
2:21
Speaker 1: Epstein had pled guilty to state charges and received a
2:25
Speaker 1: two year sentence to a registerable offense, it would never
2:29
Speaker 1: have come to the office in the first place, and
2:31
Speaker 1: therefore would not be viewed as manifest injustice. Acosta also
2:36
Speaker 1: told OPR that he was concerned that the federal prosecution
2:39
Speaker 1: in this case would result in unfavorable precedent because the
2:43
Speaker 1: Epstein case straddled the line between solicitation or prostitution, which
2:48
Speaker 1: a Costa described as traditional state concern, and trafficking, which
2:52
Speaker 1: has been an emerging matter of federal interest. A Costa
2:55
Speaker 1: intended that in two thousand and six, it would have
2:58
Speaker 1: been extremely unusual for any United States Attorney's office to
3:02
Speaker 1: become involved in a state solicitation's case, even when involving
3:06
Speaker 1: under age teens, because solicitation was the providence of state prosecutors.
3:11
Speaker 1: A Costa told OPR, I'm not saying it was the
3:14
Speaker 1: right view, but there are at least some individuals who
3:17
Speaker 1: would have looked at this and said, this is a
3:19
Speaker 1: solicitation case, not a trafficking case. Acosta was concerned that
3:24
Speaker 1: if the USAO convicted Epstein of a federal charge, an
3:28
Speaker 1: appeal might result in an adverse opinion about the distinction
3:31
Speaker 1: between prostitution and sex trafficking. Acosta also told OPR that
3:37
Speaker 1: he was concerned that a trial would be difficult for
3:39
Speaker 1: Epstein's victims. In Acosta's estimation, a trial court in two
3:43
Speaker 1: thousand and seven might have permitted victim shaming, which would
3:46
Speaker 1: have been traumatic for them. In addition, the fact that
3:49
Speaker 1: the state grand jury returned a one count indictment with
3:52
Speaker 1: a charge that would not require jail time suggested to
3:55
Speaker 1: Acosta that the state grand jury found little merit to
3:58
Speaker 1: the case. A Costa told OPR, I do think it's
4:02
Speaker 1: important to look back on this and try to be
4:04
Speaker 1: in the shoes of the thought process in two thousand
4:06
Speaker 1: and six and two thousand and seven, when trafficking prosecutions
4:10
Speaker 1: were fairly new, when more so than today, some jurors
4:14
Speaker 1: may have looked at this as prostitution, and a judge's
4:17
Speaker 1: tolerance for victim shaming may have caused more hesitation on
4:20
Speaker 1: the part of the victims. Finally, a Costa told OPR
4:24
Speaker 1: that a state based resolution offered more flexibility in fashioning
4:28
Speaker 1: a sentence because he believed prosecutors would have difficulty persuading
4:32
Speaker 1: a federal district court in the Southern District of Florida
4:35
Speaker 1: to approve a federal plea for a stipulated binding sentence
4:38
Speaker 1: that differed from the otherwise applicable federal sentence in guidelines Range.
4:43
Speaker 1: In summarizing his thinking at the time, a Costa told
4:46
Speaker 1: OPR the way the matter came to the office was
4:50
Speaker 1: the state wasn't doing enough. It didn't provide for prison time,
4:53
Speaker 1: it didn't provide for registration, and then you had the
4:56
Speaker 1: restitution issue. There were legal issues, there were witness issues,
5:00
Speaker 1: and we could go to trial and we may or
5:02
Speaker 1: may not prevail. Alternatively, we look at a pre indictment resolution,
5:07
Speaker 1: and at various points the office went back and forth
5:10
Speaker 1: between a federal pre indictment resolution and a state pre
5:13
Speaker 1: indictment resolution. Acosta told OPR that in the end, there
5:17
Speaker 1: was a preference for deferring to the state because in part,
5:21
Speaker 1: the facts of the Epstein case at the time appeared
5:24
Speaker 1: to constitute solicitation or a prostitution rather than trafficking, and
5:28
Speaker 1: a federal prosecution would be unchartered territory. Acosta explained that
5:33
Speaker 1: he did not view it as problematic to defer resolution
5:36
Speaker 1: of the case to the state, although as the Epstein
5:39
Speaker 1: case played out, the federal role became more intrusive than
5:42
Speaker 1: he anticipated because the defense tried to get the state
5:45
Speaker 1: to circumvent and undermine the outcome. Mentchell could not recall
5:49
Speaker 1: who initially suggested a state plea, but noted to OPR
5:52
Speaker 1: that his own emails make clear that this course of
5:55
Speaker 1: action was ultimately decided by Alex Acosta. He referenced, among others,
6:01
Speaker 1: at his May fourteenth, two thousand and seven email to
6:03
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna, informing her that Acosta was deciding how we
6:07
Speaker 1: wanted to handle the case. Menchell surmised that a state
6:10
Speaker 1: resolution accomplished two things that a cost of viewed as important. First,
6:15
Speaker 1: it resolved any petite policy concerns, and second, it afforded
6:19
Speaker 1: more flexibility in sentencing than a federal plea would have allowed.
6:23
Speaker 1: Menchell told OPR that the state plea proposal did not
6:26
Speaker 1: reflect any minimization of Epstein's conduct, and that any state
6:30
Speaker 1: plea would have to be an offense that required sexual
6:33
Speaker 1: offender registration. He told OPR, I don't think anybody sat
6:37
Speaker 1: around and said, you know, it's not a big deal.
6:39
Speaker 1: That was not the reaction that I think anybody had
6:42
Speaker 1: from the federal side of this case. Rather, Menchell said
6:45
Speaker 1: the concern was, if we charge them as proposed, there's
6:49
Speaker 1: going to be a trial. Two July two thousand and seven,
6:52
Speaker 1: Vila Fauna and Menchell disagree about the proposed state resolution.
6:57
Speaker 1: Vilafanna told OPR that she was angry when she Steve
7:00
Speaker 1: Mitchell's July email explaining that he had proposed to Sanchez
7:03
Speaker 1: resolving the federal investigation through a state plea. In Villa
7:07
Speaker 1: Fanna's view, the proposed state resolution didn't make any sense
7:11
Speaker 1: and did not correspond to Department policy requiring that a
7:14
Speaker 1: plea offer reflect the most serious, readily provable offense, and
7:18
Speaker 1: her view, a plea to a state charge obviously would
7:21
Speaker 1: not satisfy this policy. Vila Fauna told OPR that in
7:25
Speaker 1: her view, the u SAM required the USAO to confer
7:29
Speaker 1: with the investigative agency about plea negotiations, and Villa Fauna
7:32
Speaker 1: did not believe the FBI would be in favor of
7:35
Speaker 1: a state plea. Villa Fauna also believed that the CVRA
7:40
Speaker 1: required attorneys for the government to confer with victims before
7:44
Speaker 1: making a plea offer, but the victims had not been
7:46
Speaker 1: consulted about this proposal. Villafana told OPR that she had
7:51
Speaker 1: met with some of the victims during the course of
7:53
Speaker 1: the investigation who had negative impressions of the State Attorney's office,
7:57
Speaker 1: and she believed that sending them back to the state
7:59
Speaker 1: of Tixmejourney's office with something those victims would not support.
8:04
Speaker 1: In light of these concerns, Villa Fauna emailed Mentchel expressing
8:08
Speaker 1: her strong disagreement with the process. It's inappropriate for you
8:12
Speaker 1: to enter into plea negotiations without consulting me or the
8:15
Speaker 1: investigative agencies, and it's more inappropriate to make a plea
8:19
Speaker 1: offer that you know is completely unacceptable to the FBI, ice,
8:23
Speaker 1: the victims, and me. The plea negotiations violate the Ashcrofft Memo,
8:28
Speaker 1: the US Attorney's Manual, and all of the various iterations
8:32
Speaker 1: of the victim's rights legislation. Strategically, you have started the
8:36
Speaker 1: plea negotiations as though we are in a position of weakness,
8:39
Speaker 1: anxious to make the case go away by telling the
8:42
Speaker 1: defense that we will demand no federal conviction. We left
8:46
Speaker 1: the meeting on June twenty sixth in a stronger position
8:49
Speaker 1: than when we entered, and your statement that a state
8:51
Speaker 1: resolution would satisfy US takes away that advantage. If you
8:55
Speaker 1: make it seem like the US Attorneys doesn't have faith
8:58
Speaker 1: in our investigation, Epstein has no incentive to make a deal. Second,
9:03
Speaker 1: your discussion makes it appear that my investigation is for
9:06
Speaker 1: show only and completely undermines my ability to deal with
9:09
Speaker 1: Epstein's attorneys directly. I would like to make a presentation
9:13
Speaker 1: to the US Attorney Jeff Slowman, Andy Lori, and you
9:17
Speaker 1: with our side of the investigation and our revised indictment.
9:21
Speaker 1: The presentation will address the point raised by Epstein's council
9:24
Speaker 1: and will convince you all of the strength of the case.
9:28
Speaker 1: In the meantime, please feel free to direct all communication
9:31
Speaker 1: from Epstein's council to me. Menchell told OPR he realized
9:35
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna was very anxious to file charges in the case.
9:38
Speaker 1: Vila Fauna had put a tremendous amount of effort into
9:41
Speaker 1: the investigation, and Menchell was not unsympathetic at all to
9:44
Speaker 1: her desires to pursue a federal case. However, as Menchell
9:48
Speaker 1: told OPR, Vilafauna supervisors, including Acosta were trying to be
9:53
Speaker 1: a little more dispassionate, and her urgency was not respectful
9:57
Speaker 1: of Acosta's position. Menchell viewed the tone of Villafana's email
10:01
Speaker 1: as highly unacceptable and our understanding of applicable law and
10:05
Speaker 1: policy incorrect. In particular, Menchell pointed out that although the
10:09
Speaker 1: Ashcroft Memo requires prosecutors to charge the most readily provable offense,
10:15
Speaker 1: there is nevertheless room for flexibility, and that the US
10:18
Speaker 1: Attorney has discretion directly or through a designated supervisor such
10:22
Speaker 1: as Menchell, to waive the policy. Menchell's reply email began
10:26
Speaker 1: with the rebuke, both the tone and substance of your
10:29
Speaker 1: email are totally inappropriate, and in combination with other matters
10:32
Speaker 1: in the past, it seriously calls your judgment into question.
10:36
Speaker 1: As you all know, the US Attorney has not even
10:38
Speaker 1: decided whether to go forward with a prosecution in this matter.
10:42
Speaker 1: Thus you should have respected his position before engaging in
10:46
Speaker 1: plea negotiations along the same lines. Despite whatever country representations
10:51
Speaker 1: you made to the agents in this matter, it was
10:53
Speaker 1: made clear to you by the US Attorney and first
10:56
Speaker 1: assistant from the time when you first authorize to the
10:59
Speaker 1: investigation of mister Epstein, that the office had concerns about
11:02
Speaker 1: taking this case because of petit policy and the number
11:05
Speaker 1: of legal issues. Despite being told these things, you prepared
11:09
Speaker 1: a pro memo and indictment and included a definitive date
11:13
Speaker 1: for indictment. It has come to my attention that you
11:16
Speaker 1: led the agents to believe that the indictment of this
11:18
Speaker 1: matter was a foregone conclusion, and that our decision to
11:21
Speaker 1: put off the date and listen to the defense attorney's
11:24
Speaker 1: concerns is indicative of the office having second thoughts about indicting,
11:29
Speaker 1: as you well knew you were never given authorization by
11:32
Speaker 1: anyone to seek an indictment in this case. In the email,
11:36
Speaker 1: Metchell went on to explain the circumstances of his conversation
11:39
Speaker 1: with Sanchez and respond to Villafana's complaints. Lily, Sanchez called
11:44
Speaker 1: me before, not after the June twenty sixth meeting. It
11:47
Speaker 1: was an informal discussion and not in the nature of
11:49
Speaker 1: an official plea offer, but rather a feeling out by
11:52
Speaker 1: both sides as to what it might take to resolve
11:55
Speaker 1: the matter. As you were also well aware, the only
11:58
Speaker 1: reason why this office even agree to look into Epstein
12:01
Speaker 1: matter in the first instance was because of concerns that
12:04
Speaker 1: the state had not done an adequate job in vindicating
12:06
Speaker 1: the victims' rights, as you and the agents conceded. Had
12:10
Speaker 1: Epstein been convicted of a felony that resulted in a
12:13
Speaker 1: jail sentence and sex offender status, neither the FBI nor
12:16
Speaker 1: our office would ever have interceded. You should also know
12:20
Speaker 1: that my discussion with Lily Sanchez has made the U
12:23
Speaker 1: S Attorney's full knowledge. Have Lily Sanchez expressed interest in
12:27
Speaker 1: pursuing this avenue further, I certainly would have raised it
12:29
Speaker 1: with all the interested individuals in the case, including you
12:32
Speaker 1: and the agents. In any event, I fail to see
12:35
Speaker 1: how a discussion that went nowhere has hurt our bargaining position.
12:40
Speaker 1: I am also confident that no one on the defense
12:42
Speaker 1: team believes that the federal investigation in this matter has
12:46
Speaker 1: been for show. Nor are your arguments that I have
12:49
Speaker 1: violated the Ashcroft Memo, the u SAM, or any other
12:52
Speaker 1: policy well taken. As Chief of the Criminal Division, I
12:55
Speaker 1: am the person designated by the US Attorney to exercise
12:58
Speaker 1: appropriate discretion in discuiding whether certain pleas are appropriate and
13:03
Speaker 1: consistent with the Ashcroft Memo and the U SAM, not you.
13:07
Speaker 1: As for your statement that my concerns about this case
13:10
Speaker 1: hurting projects safe childhood are unfounded, I made it clear
13:13
Speaker 1: to you that those concerns were voiced by the US Attorney.
13:17
Speaker 1: Whether or not you are correct, matters of policy are
13:20
Speaker 1: always within his purview, and any decision in that area
13:24
Speaker 1: ultimately rests with him. Finally, you may not dictate the
13:27
Speaker 1: dates and people you will meet with about this or
13:30
Speaker 1: any other case. If the US Attorney or the first
13:33
Speaker 1: Assistant desire to meet with you, they will let you know,
13:36
Speaker 1: Nor will I direct Epstein's lawyers to communicate only with you.
13:40
Speaker 1: If you want to work major cases in the district,
13:43
Speaker 1: you must understand and accept the fact that there is
13:45
Speaker 1: a chain of command, something you disregard with great regularity.
13:49
Speaker 1: And just to interject here, it's funny they talk about
13:52
Speaker 1: the chain of command and then try and pin it
13:54
Speaker 1: all on Acosta. You see what they're doing here, right,
13:57
Speaker 1: and you see how the OIG let them off the hook.
13:59
Speaker 1: Villafana I acknowledged to OPR that as Criminal Division Chief
14:02
Speaker 1: Mentchell had authority to deviate from the Ashcroft Memo requiring
14:07
Speaker 1: that guilty please be the most serious, readily provable offense
14:11
Speaker 1: She disagreed, however, with the representation about her initial meeting
14:14
Speaker 1: with a Costa and Sloman regarding the Epstein investigation. Noting
14:18
Speaker 1: that Menchell had not been at the meeting, Villa Fauna
14:21
Speaker 1: told OPR no one had communicated to her the concerns
14:26
Speaker 1: Menchell mentioned and she had not been given an opportunity
14:29
Speaker 1: to respond to those concerns. A week later, at Villa
14:31
Speaker 1: Fauna replied to Menchell's email, reiterating her concerns about the
14:35
Speaker 1: process and the filing charges against Epstein and not moving forward. Hi, Matt,
14:41
Speaker 1: my trial is over, so I now have time to
14:43
Speaker 1: focus back on this case and the email exchange. There
14:47
Speaker 1: are several points in the email I'd like to address,
14:49
Speaker 1: and I also would like to address where we are
14:52
Speaker 1: in the case. First, I wanted to address the comment
14:54
Speaker 1: about jumping the chain of command. After that concern was
14:58
Speaker 1: brought to my attention several months ago. I have tried
15:00
Speaker 1: very hard to be cognizant of the chain of command.
15:03
Speaker 1: If there is a particular instance of violating the chain
15:05
Speaker 1: of command that you would like to discuss, I would
15:08
Speaker 1: be happy to discuss it with you. The statement that
15:11
Speaker 1: I have not respected Alex's position regarding the prosecution of
15:14
Speaker 1: the case demonstrates why you hear the frustration in the
15:17
Speaker 1: tone of my email. For two and a half months,
15:21
Speaker 1: I have been asking about what that position is. I
15:23
Speaker 1: have asked for direction on whether to revise the indictment,
15:26
Speaker 1: whether there are other issues that Alex wants addressed prior
15:29
Speaker 1: to deciding, whether there is additional investigation that needs to
15:33
Speaker 1: be done, etc. None of that direction has been forthcoming,
15:37
Speaker 1: so I'm left with victims and agents all demanding to
15:40
Speaker 1: know why we aren't presenting an indictment. Perhaps that lack
15:44
Speaker 1: of direction is through no fault of yours, but I
15:47
Speaker 1: have been dealing with a black box, so I do
15:49
Speaker 1: not know to whom I should address my frustration. My
15:53
Speaker 1: recollection of the original meeting with Alex and Jeff is
15:56
Speaker 1: quite different than your summary. In that meeting, I summarize
15:59
Speaker 1: the case in the State of Attorney's office handling of it.
16:01
Speaker 1: I acknowledged that we needed to do work to collect
16:04
Speaker 1: evidence establishing a federal nexus, and I noted the time
16:08
Speaker 1: and money that would be required for an investigation. I
16:11
Speaker 1: said I was willing to invest that time, and the
16:14
Speaker 1: FBI was willing to invest the money, but I didn't
16:16
Speaker 1: want to get to the end and then have the
16:18
Speaker 1: office be intimidated by a high powered lawyer. I was
16:22
Speaker 1: assured that that would not happen. Now I feel like
16:24
Speaker 1: there is a glass ceiling that prevents me from moving
16:26
Speaker 1: forward while evidence suggests that Epstein is continuing to engage
16:30
Speaker 1: in criminal behavior. Additionally, the FBI has identified two more victims.
16:35
Speaker 1: If the case is not going forward, I think it's
16:37
Speaker 1: unfair to give hope to more girls. As far as
16:40
Speaker 1: promising the FBI that an indictment was a foregone conclusion,
16:44
Speaker 1: I don't know of any case in the office where
16:46
Speaker 1: an investigation has been opened with the plan not to indict,
16:50
Speaker 1: and I never presented an indictment package that has resulted
16:53
Speaker 1: in a declination. I didn't treat this case any differently.
16:57
Speaker 1: I work with the agents to gather evidence and pared
17:00
Speaker 1: an indictment package that I believed establishes probable cause that
17:04
Speaker 1: a series of crimes have been committed. More importantly, I
17:07
Speaker 1: believe there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt of Epstein's
17:10
Speaker 1: criminal culpability. Lastly, I was not trying to dictate a
17:14
Speaker 1: meeting with the US attorney or anyone else. I stated
17:17
Speaker 1: that I would like to schedule a meeting asking to
17:19
Speaker 1: have the same courtesy that was extended to the defense
17:22
Speaker 1: attorneys extended to the FBI and an assistant in the office.
17:26
Speaker 1: With respect to your questions regarding my judgment, I will
17:29
Speaker 1: simply say that disagreements about strategy and raising concerns about
17:33
Speaker 1: the forgotten voices of the victims in this case should
17:35
Speaker 1: not be classified as a lapse in judgment. This office
17:39
Speaker 1: should seek the foster spirited debate about the law and
17:42
Speaker 1: the use of prosecutorial direction and discretion. My first and
17:46
Speaker 1: only concern in this case and my other child exploitation
17:49
Speaker 1: cases is the victims. If our personality differences threaten their
17:53
Speaker 1: access to justice, then please put someone on the case
17:56
Speaker 1: whom you trust more and who will also protect their rights. Meantime,
18:00
Speaker 1: I will be meeting with the agents on Monday to
18:02
Speaker 1: begin preparing a revised indictment package containing your suggestions on
18:06
Speaker 1: the indictment and responding to the issues raised by Epstein's attorneys.
18:11
Speaker 1: And if there are any specific issues that you or
18:13
Speaker 1: the US attorney would like to see addressed, please let
18:16
Speaker 1: me know. Villa Fauna did not get the meeting with
18:18
Speaker 1: a costa that she requested. She viewed Menchell's message as
18:21
Speaker 1: a rejection of her request to make a presentation to Acosta,
18:25
Speaker 1: and she told OPR that even though she regarded Sloman
18:28
Speaker 1: as a friend, she did not feel she could reach
18:31
Speaker 1: out even to him to raise her concerns. Menchell, however,
18:34
Speaker 1: told OPR that he did not order a Villa Fauna
18:37
Speaker 1: to refrain from raising her concerns with Acosta, Slowman or Laurie,
18:41
Speaker 1: and he did not believe his emailed to Villa Fauna
18:44
Speaker 1: foreclosed her for meeting with Acosta. Rather, the context of
18:48
Speaker 1: this exchange is she is running rough shot over the
18:50
Speaker 1: US attorney, and what I'm saying to her is there's
18:53
Speaker 1: a process. You're not in charge of it. I'm not
18:56
Speaker 1: in charge of it. Acosta's in charge of it. Acosta,
18:59
Speaker 1: who was apparently not aware of Villa Fanna's email exchange
19:01
Speaker 1: with Mitchell, told OPR that from his perspective, Vila Fauna
19:05
Speaker 1: was not frozen out of the case, and that he
19:08
Speaker 1: who would have met with her had she asked him
19:10
Speaker 1: directly for a meeting. All right, we're gonna wrap up
19:13
Speaker 1: right there, and in the next episode we're gonna pick
19:15
Speaker 1: up with b. Villa Fauna attempts to obtain the computer
19:19
Speaker 1: equipment missing from Epstein's pom Beach home, but the defense
19:22
Speaker 1: team opposes their efforts. All of the information that goes
19:25
Speaker 1: with this episode can be found in the description box.
19:29
Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
19:33
Speaker 1: In this episode, we're going to pick up where we
19:35
Speaker 1: left off with the OIG report into Jeffrey Epstein's non
19:39
Speaker 1: prosecution Agreement, Part B. Villa Fauna attempts to obtain the
19:44
Speaker 1: computer equipment missing from Epstein's pom Beach home, but the
19:47
Speaker 1: defense team opposes their efforts. As the USAO managers considered
19:53
Speaker 1: in July two thousand and seven how to resolve the
19:56
Speaker 1: federal investigation, one item of evidence they did not have
19:59
Speaker 1: a to assist in that decision was the computer equipment
20:03
Speaker 1: removed from Epstein's home before Palm Beach executed as search warrant.
20:08
Speaker 1: Although Villa Fauna took steps to obtain the evidence, defense
20:11
Speaker 1: counsel continued to oppose her efforts. Early in the federal investigation,
20:16
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna recognized the potential significance of obtaining the missing
20:20
Speaker 1: computer equipment. Villa Fauna told OPR that she and the
20:24
Speaker 1: FBI agents went through every photograph found in Epstein's home,
20:28
Speaker 1: but found none that could be characterized as child pornography. Nevertheless,
20:32
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna told OPR that the investigators had learned that
20:36
Speaker 1: Epstein used hidden cameras in his New York residence to
20:39
Speaker 1: record his sexual encounters, and she believed he could have
20:43
Speaker 1: engaged in similar conduct in his Palm Beach home. In addition,
20:47
Speaker 1: the computer equipment potentially contained surveillance video that might have
20:51
Speaker 1: corroborated victim statements about visiting Epstein's home. More generally, in
20:56
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna's experience, individuals involved in child deexisloitation often possessed
21:02
Speaker 1: child pornography. Villa Fauna's co counsel, who had substantial experience
21:08
Speaker 1: prosecuting child pornography cases, similarly told OPR Epstein was a billionaire.
21:13
Speaker 1: We knew his house was wired with video. It would
21:15
Speaker 1: be unusual for someone with his capabilities not to be
21:19
Speaker 1: video recording his encounters. As the investigation continued, Villa Fauna
21:24
Speaker 1: took various steps to acquire the computer equipment removed from
21:27
Speaker 1: Epstein's Palm Beach residence, as noted previously in this report.
21:31
Speaker 1: In her initial request to Epstein's Council for documents. She
21:35
Speaker 1: asked Defense counsel to provide the computer's hard drives, CPUs,
21:39
Speaker 1: and any other computer media including CD ROMs, DVD's, floppy discs,
21:44
Speaker 1: flash drives, et cetera, removed from the residents. Although Lori
21:48
Speaker 1: subsequently narrowed the government's request for documents, the request for
21:52
Speaker 1: computer equipment remained. The Defense, however, failed to comply with
21:56
Speaker 1: the request. Villa Fauna learned the computer equipment was in
22:00
Speaker 1: the possession of a particular individual. After consulting Department Computer
22:05
Speaker 1: Crime and Intellectual Property Section and Office of Enforcement Operations
22:09
Speaker 1: about the appropriate legal steps to obtain the computer equipment,
22:13
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna described her plan in an email dimension She
22:16
Speaker 1: asked Menchell for any comments or concerns, but OPR did
22:21
Speaker 1: not find an email response from him, and Menchell told
22:24
Speaker 1: OPR that he did not recall Villafauna's efforts to obtain
22:27
Speaker 1: the computer equipment. In May two thousand and seven, following
22:31
Speaker 1: the plan she had outlined to Menchell, Villa Fauna initiated
22:34
Speaker 1: action requiring production of the computer equipment by a particular date.
22:39
Speaker 1: In her email to Villa Fauna on June twenty ninth,
22:41
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, Sanchez requested a two week extension,
22:45
Speaker 1: indicating that she had hoped the state based resolution to
22:48
Speaker 1: the case would soon be reached. Villafauna advised her supervisors
22:52
Speaker 1: of the request and responded to Sanchez that she would
22:56
Speaker 1: like to get the computer equipment as soon as possible. Nonetheless,
23:00
Speaker 1: Villafauna eventually agreed to the extension. Meanwhile, Epstein attorney Roy
23:06
Speaker 1: Black wrote separately to Villa Fauna demanding to know whether
23:09
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna had complied with applicable Department policies before seeking
23:14
Speaker 1: the computer equipment. After further communications on this issue involving Black, Sanchez,
23:19
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna, and Lori Black took legal action that effectively
23:23
Speaker 1: halted production of the computer equipment to the USAO until
23:26
Speaker 1: the issue could be decided by the court, which is
23:29
Speaker 1: explained below. Never happened because the parties entered into the
23:33
Speaker 1: NPA CE July two thousand and seven. The Defense continues
23:38
Speaker 1: its efforts to stop the federal investigation. In addition to
23:42
Speaker 1: their efforts to stop the government from obtaining the computer equipment,
23:45
Speaker 1: Defense Council also set letters to the USAO dated July sixth,
23:49
Speaker 1: two thousand seven, and July twenty fifth, two thousand seven,
23:53
Speaker 1: reiterating their objections to a federal investigation of Epstein. The
23:57
Speaker 1: July twenty fifth, two thousand seven letter included a lengthy
24:01
Speaker 1: case analysis chart purporting to support the defense argument that
24:05
Speaker 1: Epstein had committed no federal offense. The July twenty fifth
24:09
Speaker 1: letter also noted that the defense had been consulting with
24:12
Speaker 1: former Principal Deputy Chief of CEOs, reporting that she supports
24:17
Speaker 1: our position without reservation that this is not a matter
24:20
Speaker 1: upon which the federal statutes should be brought to bear.
24:23
Speaker 1: While the defense was reiterating its objections to the federal investigation,
24:28
Speaker 1: CEOs expressed its endorsement of Villa Fauna's legal analysis and
24:32
Speaker 1: proposed charges. On July eighteenth, two thousand and seven, CEO's
24:36
Speaker 1: chief Osterbahn emailed Slowman, Menchel and LORII, stating that he
24:41
Speaker 1: had read Villa Fauna's prosecution memorandum closely and noting that
24:45
Speaker 1: she did a terrific job. As we opined to Andy
24:48
Speaker 1: back in May, CEOs agrees with her legal analysis, her
24:52
Speaker 1: charging decisions are legally sound. Osterbon observed, I have also
24:56
Speaker 1: reviewed the arguments contained in the letters from Defense cont Council.
25:00
Speaker 1: Their legal analysis is detailed and comprehensive, but I find
25:04
Speaker 1: none of their arguments persuasive. That is not to say
25:07
Speaker 1: that all the arguments are completely devoid of merit. I
25:10
Speaker 1: expect the judge to consider some of the arguments closely. Nevertheless,
25:14
Speaker 1: while the law is applicable here is not always crystal
25:17
Speaker 1: clear the balance of available precedent favors US. From the
25:21
Speaker 1: prosecution memorandum, it's clear that Marie has anticipated the strongest
25:25
Speaker 1: legal arguments, scrutinize the applicable law, and has charged the
25:29
Speaker 1: case accordingly. And while with this prosecution the government clearly
25:33
Speaker 1: faces a strong and determined defense team, it's a challenge
25:37
Speaker 1: well worth facing. I also happen to know that there
25:40
Speaker 1: is absolutely no concern about facing the challenges this case presents.
25:45
Speaker 1: In closing, Osterbon renewed his offer to have CEOs help
25:49
Speaker 1: you with the prosecution and to send whatever and whoever
25:53
Speaker 1: you need to assist. D Acosta decides on a resolution
25:57
Speaker 1: that includes a two year term of incarceration. The next
26:01
Speaker 1: critical step in the development of the NPA was the
26:04
Speaker 1: decision to propose a two year term of imprisonment. Although
26:08
Speaker 1: presented to the defense as the minimum the USAO would accept.
26:12
Speaker 1: In actuality, the two year proposal became only the starting
26:15
Speaker 1: point for the negotiations, with the result that the Defense
26:19
Speaker 1: continued to chip away at it as the negotiations continued.
26:23
Speaker 1: The contemporaneous females make no mention of any rationale for
26:27
Speaker 1: the decision to propose two years as the government's beginning
26:30
Speaker 1: negotiation position, and nobody with whom OPR spoke was able
26:35
Speaker 1: to recall how the decision was made as discussed below.
26:38
Speaker 1: Acosta did offer OPR an explanation, but OPR was unable
26:42
Speaker 1: to find contemporaneous evidence supporting it. While the Defense was
26:47
Speaker 1: communicating its objections to the federal investigation to Villafauna, Lori, Menchel,
26:52
Speaker 1: and Sloman, Villa Fauna continued moving forward, filing charges. On
26:56
Speaker 1: July nineteen, two thousand seven, the day after receips ving
27:00
Speaker 1: Oster Bond's email supporting a potential prosecution, Villa Fauna email
27:04
Speaker 1: Louri and Menchell seeking approval to take further investigative steps
27:09
Speaker 1: regarding three Epstein assistance. However, Menchell directed Villa Fauna to
27:13
Speaker 1: hold off until we decide what course of action we're
27:16
Speaker 1: going to take on Epstein, which should happen next week.
27:20
Speaker 1: Menchell told OPR that he did not specifically recall why
27:23
Speaker 1: he asked Villa Fauna to wait, but he assumed it
27:25
Speaker 1: was because Acosta was deciding what course of action to
27:28
Speaker 1: take on the case. On Monday, July twenty third, two
27:32
Speaker 1: thousand and seven, Menschell submitted a resignation noticed to Acosta,
27:36
Speaker 1: stating that he would be leaving the USAO effective August
27:39
Speaker 1: sixth two thousand and seven. One July twenty six, two
27:44
Speaker 1: thousand and seven meeting in Miami. Early on the morning
27:47
Speaker 1: of Thursday, July twenty six, two thousand and seven, Villa
27:50
Speaker 1: Fauna inform Menchel that she was preparing a new draft
27:53
Speaker 1: indictment containing revisions he had suggested, including removal of all
27:58
Speaker 1: but three of the travel compunce and a large number
28:01
Speaker 1: of the overt acts, and the addition of overt acts
28:04
Speaker 1: and counts related to two additional victims. She would, not, however,
28:08
Speaker 1: have the revised indictment ready in time for our discussion today.
28:11
Speaker 1: At their two PM meeting, Menchell told OPR that the
28:15
Speaker 1: fact that he had both proposed revisions to the indictment
28:18
Speaker 1: and also directed Villa Fauna to delay the investigative steps
28:22
Speaker 1: involving the assistance. Indicated that he was trying to do
28:25
Speaker 1: something with the case, but was waiting for Acosta to
28:28
Speaker 1: decide the underlying issue of whether to proceed with federal charges.
28:32
Speaker 1: Acosta made the decision on or before July twenty six,
28:36
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven. On that afternoon, Villa Fauna met
28:39
Speaker 1: in Miami with Menchell. She told OPR that Slowman, as
28:42
Speaker 1: well as the FBI case agents and their supervisors were
28:46
Speaker 1: also present, with Lori anticipating and participating by telephone. Villa
28:51
Speaker 1: Fauna told OPR that she expected that the meeting requested
28:55
Speaker 1: by Mentchell would address the direction of the investigation. However,
28:58
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna told OPR that everyone had assembled, Menchell entered
29:02
Speaker 1: the room and stated that Acosta has decided to offer
29:05
Speaker 1: a two year deal. According to Villa Fauna, Menchell left
29:09
Speaker 1: the meeting after almost no discussion, Leavin Villa Fauna shocked
29:12
Speaker 1: and stunned. Menchell told o PR that he did not
29:15
Speaker 1: recall the July twenty six, two thousand and seven meeting. Nonetheless,
29:19
Speaker 1: he strongly disputed Villafana's description of events, asserting that it
29:23
Speaker 1: would have been directly at odds with his management style.
29:27
Speaker 1: To convene such a meeting, announce Acosta's decision, and leave
29:30
Speaker 1: without discussion. Acosta told o PR that he had decided
29:34
Speaker 1: and endorsed his resolution at some point, but he did
29:37
Speaker 1: not recall being aware that Menchell was going to announce
29:40
Speaker 1: the decision at the July twenty sixth meeting. In addition,
29:44
Speaker 1: although Acosta did not recall the circumstances of Menchell relaying
29:48
Speaker 1: of that decision, he said it would have been consistent
29:51
Speaker 1: with his decision for Menchell to do so. Neither Slowman
29:54
Speaker 1: nor Lourie recalled the meeting. The FBI case agent recalled
29:58
Speaker 1: attending a meeting but at the USAO in Miami with
30:01
Speaker 1: her co case agent and supervisors, together with Villa Fauna,
30:05
Speaker 1: Lori by telephone and Menchal Inslowman, at which they discussed
30:09
Speaker 1: how to proceed with the Epstein case. According to the
30:12
Speaker 1: case agent, at this meeting, the FBI insisted that Epstein
30:16
Speaker 1: be registered for life as a sexual offender, and the
30:19
Speaker 1: co case agent advocated for waiting until the court had
30:22
Speaker 1: ruled on the usao's ability to obtain Epstein's computer equipment.
30:27
Speaker 1: Regardless of exactly how Acosta's decision regarding the two year
30:30
Speaker 1: term was communicated to Villa Fauna and the FBI agents,
30:34
Speaker 1: and regardless of who initially proposed the specific term, the
30:38
Speaker 1: record shows that Acosta ultimately made the decision to offer
30:42
Speaker 1: Epstein a resolution that included a two year term of imprisonment,
30:46
Speaker 1: as he acknowledged. All right, folks, who are going to
30:49
Speaker 1: wrap up this episode here and then the next episode
30:51
Speaker 1: we're going to pick up with the subject's explanation for
30:54
Speaker 1: decision to offer Epstein a sentence with a two year
30:57
Speaker 1: term of incarceration. Of the information that goes with this
31:01
Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone,
31:05
Speaker 1: and welcome back to the Epstein chronicles. In this episode,
31:08
Speaker 1: we're getting right back to the OIG report into Jeffrey
31:12
Speaker 1: Epstein's non prosecution Agreement, Part two, the subject's explanations for
31:18
Speaker 1: the decision to offer Epstein a sentence with a two
31:21
Speaker 1: year term incarceration. Villa Fauna asserted that she was not
31:26
Speaker 1: consulted about the specific two year term before the decision
31:29
Speaker 1: was made. Villa Fauna told OPR that she had worked
31:32
Speaker 1: hard to develop a strong case and none of her
31:35
Speaker 1: supervisors had identified to her any specific problem with the
31:39
Speaker 1: case that in her view explained the decision to extend
31:42
Speaker 1: an offer for a two year sentence. Villa Fauna told
31:46
Speaker 1: OPR that Menchell provided no explanation for his decision during
31:50
Speaker 1: the July twenty six, two thousand and seven meeting, and
31:53
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna did not ask for an explanation because she
31:56
Speaker 1: accepted his statement that it was a Costa's decision. Vilafauna
32:00
Speaker 1: described the proposal as random and told OPR where all
32:04
Speaker 1: sentencing guidelined people, so twenty four months just makes no
32:08
Speaker 1: sense in the context of the guidelines. There's no way
32:11
Speaker 1: to get to twenty four months with this set of offenses.
32:15
Speaker 1: Sloman also told OPR that he did not know how
32:18
Speaker 1: the decision to offer a two year plea offer was reached,
32:22
Speaker 1: but he believed that Acosta made the decision based on
32:25
Speaker 1: recommendations from Menchell, Lorii, and Villa Fauna. He opined OPR
32:30
Speaker 1: that the decision was likely based on an assessment by
32:33
Speaker 1: Menchell and LORII of the litigation risk presented by the case.
32:37
Speaker 1: Sloman added that he did not know how a two
32:40
Speaker 1: year sentence might have related to specific charges or to
32:43
Speaker 1: either state or federal sentencing guidelines. Lauri, likewise told OPR
32:47
Speaker 1: He did not recall how the two year term was
32:50
Speaker 1: decided upon or by whom, but he speculated that it
32:53
Speaker 1: may have been presented by the defense as the most
32:57
Speaker 1: Epstein would accept, and that the decision would have been
32:59
Speaker 1: reached by Acosta following extended consideration, research and discussion among Acosta, Sloman, Menchell, Louri,
33:08
Speaker 1: and Villafauna. Menchell told OPR that he did not recall
33:12
Speaker 1: discussing a two year plead deal with Acosta or who
33:15
Speaker 1: reached the decision that two years was an appropriate sentence.
33:19
Speaker 1: Menchell also told OPR, however, that he recalled believing that
33:23
Speaker 1: if the USAO had filed the contemplated federal charges, Epstein
33:27
Speaker 1: would have felt he had nothing to lose and undoubtedly
33:30
Speaker 1: would have chosen to take the case to trial. Menchell
33:34
Speaker 1: recalled believing that there was a real risk that the
33:36
Speaker 1: USAO might lose at trial, and in so doing, might
33:39
Speaker 1: cause more trauma to the victims, particularly those who were
33:43
Speaker 1: reluctant to testify. Menchell told o PR that he did
33:46
Speaker 1: not believe that anyone at the time looked at two
33:49
Speaker 1: years as a fair result in terms of the conduct.
33:52
Speaker 1: I think that was not the issue. The issue is
33:54
Speaker 1: whether or not if we took this case to trial,
33:57
Speaker 1: we would risk losing everything, and if we felt we
34:00
Speaker 1: could have gotten more time, we would have without having
34:03
Speaker 1: to press it to trial. A Costa told OPR that
34:07
Speaker 1: I had decided and endorsed the two year resolution at
34:10
Speaker 1: some point, and that it resulted from back and forth
34:14
Speaker 1: discussion over the course of some days or a week
34:16
Speaker 1: or two. As noted earlier in this report, A cost
34:19
Speaker 1: Of viewed the usao's role in this case merely as
34:22
Speaker 1: a backstop to the state's prosecution, which he explained to
34:25
Speaker 1: OPR was a polite way of saying encouraging the state
34:29
Speaker 1: to do a little bit more. A Costa said that
34:31
Speaker 1: he understood two years' imprisonment to have represented the sentence
34:35
Speaker 1: Epstein faced under one of the original charges the pom
34:39
Speaker 1: Beach Police was considering at the outset of the state investigation.
34:43
Speaker 1: A Costa also told OPR that he understood that the
34:47
Speaker 1: pom Beach Police Department would not have asked the FBI
34:50
Speaker 1: to investigate Epstein if the state had pursued the appropriate charges.
34:54
Speaker 1: In other words, in a Costa's view, this was rightly
34:57
Speaker 1: or wrongly an analysis that distinguished between what is necessary
35:01
Speaker 1: to prevent manifest injustice versus what is the appropriate federal
35:05
Speaker 1: outcome to that? A. Costa told OPR that he believed
35:09
Speaker 1: he had discussed his concerns about the case with Lori
35:12
Speaker 1: Slowman or Menchell, although he could not recall any specific
35:16
Speaker 1: conversations with them. He Villa Fauna drafts a term sheet
35:20
Speaker 1: listing the requirements of a potential agreement with the Defense.
35:24
Speaker 1: A meeting with defense counsel was scheduled for Tuesday, July
35:27
Speaker 1: thirty first, two thousand and seven. Villa Fauna told OPR
35:31
Speaker 1: that between July twenty six and July thirtieth, two thousand
35:35
Speaker 1: and seven, she had some sort of discussion with her
35:37
Speaker 1: supervisors that resulted in her creation of a term sheet
35:41
Speaker 1: identifying the proposed terms for resolving the federal investigation through
35:45
Speaker 1: state charges. Sometime during that period, Villa Fauna left a
35:49
Speaker 1: voicemail message for Menchell. During the OPR interviews, neither Villa
35:53
Speaker 1: Fauna nor Menchell could recall what Villa Fauna said in
35:56
Speaker 1: that message. On July thirtieth, two thousand and seven, Menchell
36:00
Speaker 1: emailed Villa Fauna, I received your voicemail this morning. I
36:03
Speaker 1: don't see any reason to change your approach, I think
36:06
Speaker 1: telling them that unless the State resolves this in a
36:08
Speaker 1: way that appropriately vindicates our interests and the interests of
36:11
Speaker 1: the victims, we will seek federal charges conveys that were serious.
36:16
Speaker 1: While Lily Sanchez is represented in the past that this
36:19
Speaker 1: would likely not happen, I never conveyed it in quite
36:22
Speaker 1: these terms before. In any event, this is the course
36:25
Speaker 1: of action that the US Attorney feels comfortable taking at
36:28
Speaker 1: this juncture. The following day, July thirty first, two thousand
36:32
Speaker 1: and seven, Vila Fauna email the one page terms of
36:35
Speaker 1: Epstein's non prosecution agreement to Slowman Menchell and Lori. Vilafauna
36:40
Speaker 1: told OPR she had never before seen or heard of
36:42
Speaker 1: a non prosecution agreement, that it was a concept completely
36:46
Speaker 1: foreign to her. Villafauna told OPR that the idea of
36:50
Speaker 1: styling the two years state plea agreement with Epstein as
36:53
Speaker 1: a non prosecution agreement came from Acosta, although Menchell may
36:57
Speaker 1: have communicated that terminology tour. According to Villafauna, she asked
37:01
Speaker 1: that it include a mechanism for the victims to be
37:04
Speaker 1: provided monetary compensation through US Code eighteen, Section twenty two
37:09
Speaker 1: fifty five in lieu of the restitution that would have
37:11
Speaker 1: been available if Epstein were pleading guilty to federal charges.
37:16
Speaker 1: A Costa told OPR that he developed and approved the
37:19
Speaker 1: term sheet before the document was presented to Defense Council.
37:23
Speaker 1: Two terms were dropped from Villa Fauna's draft, one providing
37:26
Speaker 1: that the agreement would apply only to already identified victims,
37:30
Speaker 1: and another requiring the deal to be accepted and Epstein
37:33
Speaker 1: to plead guilty within the month. The final term sheet
37:36
Speaker 1: was as follows. Terms of Epstein's non prosecution agreement. Epstein
37:40
Speaker 1: pleads guilty to an information filed by the Palm Beach
37:44
Speaker 1: County State Attorney's Office charging him with a lewd and
37:47
Speaker 1: lascivious battery on a child in violation of Florida Statute
37:51
Speaker 1: eight hundred Dos zero four to four B solicitation of
37:55
Speaker 1: miners to engage in prostitution in violation of Florida Statute
37:59
Speaker 1: seven ninety six three n see engaging in sexual activity
38:03
Speaker 1: with miners at least sixteen years of age in violation
38:07
Speaker 1: of Florida Statute seven ninety four dot five. Epstein and
38:11
Speaker 1: the State Attorney's Office make a joint binding recommendation that
38:14
Speaker 1: Epstein serve at least two years in prison, without any
38:17
Speaker 1: opportunity for withholding, adjudication or sentencing, and without probation or
38:22
Speaker 1: community control. In lieu of imprisonment, Epstein agrees to waive
38:27
Speaker 1: all challenges to the information filed by the state and
38:29
Speaker 1: the right to appeal. Epstein agrees that if any of
38:32
Speaker 1: the victims identified in the federal investigation file suit pursuant
38:37
Speaker 1: to US Code eighteen, Section twenty two fifty five, Epstein
38:40
Speaker 1: will not contest the jurisdiction of the U s District
38:43
Speaker 1: Court for the Southern District of Florida over his person
38:47
Speaker 1: and subject matter. While Epstein will not contest the identified
38:50
Speaker 1: victims are persons who, while miners, were victims of violations
38:54
Speaker 1: of Title eighteen United States Code, Section twenty four to
38:58
Speaker 1: twenty two and or twenty four or twenty three. After
39:02
Speaker 1: Epstein enters the state court plea and dissentans, the FBI
39:05
Speaker 1: and the US Attorney's Office will close their investigation. The
39:09
Speaker 1: USAO presents Epstein with key terms of a deal. Plead
39:13
Speaker 1: guilty to state charges requiring a two year term of
39:15
Speaker 1: incarceration and sexual offender registration, and agree to a means
39:20
Speaker 1: for the victims to obtain monetary damages. Although the USAO
39:24
Speaker 1: term sheet was presented to Epstein's defense team on July
39:27
Speaker 1: thirty one, two thousand and seven, it took almost another
39:30
Speaker 1: two months to reach a final agreement in the form
39:33
Speaker 1: of the NPA. The contemporaneous emails show that over the
39:37
Speaker 1: course of those two months, defense council offered multiple counterproposals
39:41
Speaker 1: to the USAO stated terms, and alternated between working out
39:45
Speaker 1: the state plead disposition and seeking an alternative federal plea agreement.
39:50
Speaker 1: The emails may clear that as the negotiations intensified in
39:54
Speaker 1: September of two thousand and seven, the prosecutors became increasingly frustrated,
39:58
Speaker 1: particularly with what the they perceived as the defense tactic
40:02
Speaker 1: of agreeing to terms and provisions, but then backtracking or
40:05
Speaker 1: altering the agreed upon terms in subsequent communications. It's apparent
40:10
Speaker 1: that the defense persistence achieved some measure of success, at
40:14
Speaker 1: least concerning the period of imprisonment, because the USAO failed
40:18
Speaker 1: the whole firm to its proposal of at least two
40:20
Speaker 1: years in prison. The USAO did, however, consistently reject defense
40:25
Speaker 1: proposals to change other terms, particularly the requirement that Epstein
40:29
Speaker 1: register as a sexual offender. A July thirty first, two
40:35
Speaker 1: thousand and seven, the USAO presents its proposal to the
40:38
Speaker 1: defense team, which makes a counteroffer. Menchell, Slowman, Lori, Villafauna,
40:43
Speaker 1: and the case agents met with Epstein's attorneys left Court, Sanchez,
40:46
Speaker 1: and Black on July thirty first, two thousand and seven,
40:50
Speaker 1: with Menchell leading the meeting for the USAO. The USAO
40:53
Speaker 1: presented the term sheet, and Villafauna distributed a federal sentencing
40:57
Speaker 1: guideline calculation showing that if she prosecuted federally, Epstein faced
41:02
Speaker 1: the sentencing range of one hundred and eighty eight to
41:04
Speaker 1: two hundred and thirty five months of incarceration. Bilafana recalled
41:08
Speaker 1: that during the meeting, Epstein's attorneys opposed the requirement of
41:12
Speaker 1: sexual offender registration, argued that Epstein would not be safe
41:16
Speaker 1: in prison, suggested that Epstein serve a sentence of home
41:19
Speaker 1: confinement or community control in lieu of incarceration, and emphasized
41:24
Speaker 1: that a state resolution provided greater sentencing flexibility. Bilafauna told
41:29
Speaker 1: OPR that when Epstein's attorneys expressed concern during the meeting
41:32
Speaker 1: about Epstein's security in the state prison and argued for
41:35
Speaker 1: a home confinement sentence. Menchell suggested Epstein plead to a
41:39
Speaker 1: federal charge so that he could serve his time in
41:41
Speaker 1: a federal facility. A few days after the meeting, Villa
41:44
Speaker 1: Fauna emailed Menchell stating that she had figured out a
41:47
Speaker 1: way to do a federal plea with two and a
41:50
Speaker 1: half year cap although Acosta had authorized a plea to
41:54
Speaker 1: state charges. Emails and other correspondents show that during negotiations
41:58
Speaker 1: the parties also considered structuring a plea around federal charges
42:02
Speaker 1: in addition to the state charges. On behalf of the
42:05
Speaker 1: defense team, Sanchez followed up on July thirty first, two
42:09
Speaker 1: thousand and seven meeting with an August second, two thousand
42:12
Speaker 1: and seven letter de Menschell, we welcome your recognition that
42:16
Speaker 1: a state prison sentence is neither appropriate nor acceptable to
42:19
Speaker 1: mister Epstein, as the dangers of state prison system pose
42:22
Speaker 1: risks that are clearly untenable. We acknowledge that your suggestion
42:26
Speaker 1: of a plea to two federal misdemeanors was an attempt
42:29
Speaker 1: to resolve this dilemma. Our proposal is significantly punitive, and
42:34
Speaker 1: if implemented, would, we believe, leave little doubt that the
42:37
Speaker 1: federal interest was demonstrably vindicated. Sanchez added, we must keep
42:41
Speaker 1: in mind that Jeffrey Epstein is a fifty four year
42:44
Speaker 1: old man who has never been arrested before. He has
42:46
Speaker 1: lived in otherwise exemplary life. The significantly punitive proposal described
42:52
Speaker 1: in the defense letter involved no period of mandatory incarceration. Instead,
42:56
Speaker 1: Sanchez suggested two years of home confinement with regular reporting
43:01
Speaker 1: to the visits from any community control officer, payment of
43:05
Speaker 1: restitution damages, court and probationary costs and law enforcement costs,
43:09
Speaker 1: random drug testing, community service, psychological counseling, and the prohibition
43:15
Speaker 1: on unsupervised contact with the victims. The letters specifically referred
43:19
Speaker 1: to the victim damages recovery procedure and the government had
43:22
Speaker 1: proposed under US Code eighteen, section twenty two to fifty five,
43:26
Speaker 1: and represented that Epstein was prepared to fully fund the
43:29
Speaker 1: identified group of victims which are the focus of the USAO,
43:33
Speaker 1: that is, the twelve individuals noted at the meeting on
43:36
Speaker 1: July thirty one, two thousand and seven. Under the defense proposal,
43:40
Speaker 1: the state would incarcerate Epstein only if he failed to
43:43
Speaker 1: comply with the terms of supervised custody. Sanchez also advised
43:47
Speaker 1: that the defense team would be seeking a meeting with
43:50
Speaker 1: a costa. All right, we're going to wrap up right there,
43:53
Speaker 1: and in the next episode, we're going to pick up
43:55
Speaker 1: with part B. In an August third, two thousand and
43:58
Speaker 1: seven letter, the USAO states that a two year term
44:01
Speaker 1: of imprisonment is the minimum that will vindicate the federal interest.
44:05
Speaker 1: All of the information that goes with this episode can
44:08
Speaker 1: be found in the description box. What's up, everyone, and
44:12
Speaker 1: welcome back to the Epstein chronicles. In this episode, we're
44:16
Speaker 1: getting right back to the OIG report into Jeffrey Epstein's
44:20
Speaker 1: non prosecution agreement B. In an August third, two thousand
44:25
Speaker 1: and seven letter, the USAO states that a two year
44:28
Speaker 1: term of imprisonment is the minimum that will vindicate the
44:31
Speaker 1: federal interest. Villa Fauna told OPR that she and her
44:35
Speaker 1: managers agreed the counter offer was unacceptable, and she conferred
44:39
Speaker 1: with Lori or Menchel about the government's response. Villa Fauna
44:43
Speaker 1: drafted for mental signature a letter asserting that the USAO
44:48
Speaker 1: considered a two year term of imprisonment to be the
44:51
Speaker 1: minimum sentence that would vindicate the federal interest in the
44:54
Speaker 1: Epstein investigation. Villa Fauna's draft stated that the USAO has
44:59
Speaker 1: never agreed that a state prison sentence is not appropriate
45:02
Speaker 1: for mister Epstein, but was willing to allow Epstein to
45:05
Speaker 1: enter a guilty plea under a federal Rule of Criminal
45:08
Speaker 1: Procedure eleven C one C to a federal felony charge
45:13
Speaker 1: with a binding recommendation for a two year term of incarceration.
45:17
Speaker 1: Vilafauna specified that Epstein would also be required to concede
45:21
Speaker 1: liability under US Code eighteen, section twenty two fifty five
45:25
Speaker 1: for all of the victims identified during the federal investigation,
45:29
Speaker 1: not just the twelve that formed the basis of an
45:32
Speaker 1: initial plan charging instrument. Menchell made several substantive changes to
45:37
Speaker 1: Villafauna's draft letter. He specified that a two year term
45:41
Speaker 1: of state imprisonment was the minimum sentence that would satisfy
45:44
Speaker 1: the federal interest in the case. With regard to the
45:48
Speaker 1: option of a federal plea, Menchell wrote that the USAO
45:52
Speaker 1: would be willing to explore a federal conviction and retain
45:55
Speaker 1: the reference to a Rule eleven C plea. Menchell also
45:59
Speaker 1: removed the rect reference to the specific state offenses to
46:02
Speaker 1: which Epstein would be required to plead guilty Menchell forwarded
46:06
Speaker 1: the redraft to Acosta, suggesting that they speak about it
46:09
Speaker 1: the next morning, as well as the Sloman, Lori and
46:13
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna. The final letter is shown on the following pages,
46:17
Speaker 1: was identical to Menchell's redraft, except that it omitted all
46:21
Speaker 1: reference to a federal plea under Rule eleven C. Menchell
46:25
Speaker 1: told OPR that, in his view, the two year sentence
46:28
Speaker 1: established the floor for negotiations, and if Epstein rejected the offer,
46:33
Speaker 1: subsequent offers would require him to accept more jail time
46:36
Speaker 1: rather than less. Menchell told o PR that the USAO
46:40
Speaker 1: was leaving our options open by retaining the option of
46:43
Speaker 1: a federal plea because he thought the defense was trying
46:47
Speaker 1: to get him into a federal penitentiary. The letter's deadline
46:51
Speaker 1: of August seventeenth, two thousand and seven for acceptance of
46:54
Speaker 1: the government's offer was intended to accommodate Villa Fauna's requests
46:58
Speaker 1: that the deadline provide her with enough time to go
47:01
Speaker 1: to New York pursue investigative steps involving two of Epstein's
47:04
Speaker 1: assistants to witness interviews and take additional legal steps to
47:08
Speaker 1: obtain Epstein's computers. If Epstein rejected the deal. Menchell told
47:13
Speaker 1: LOPR that he considered August seventeenth to be a firm deadline.
47:17
Speaker 1: If you tell someone they have two weeks, it should
47:19
Speaker 1: be two weeks. Menchell signed and sent the letter on Friday,
47:23
Speaker 1: August third, two thousand and seven, which was his last
47:26
Speaker 1: day as the USAO before joining a private law firm.
47:31
Speaker 1: The following Monday, August sixth, two thousand and seven, villa
47:34
Speaker 1: Fauna contacted Menchell by email at his new firm to
47:37
Speaker 1: inquire whether the letter to Epstein's council had gone out
47:40
Speaker 1: on Friday. Villafauna explained to the OPR she wanted to
47:44
Speaker 1: know whether the letter went out because if the letter
47:47
Speaker 1: didn't go out, we can make this all go away
47:49
Speaker 1: and restart. Menchell confirmed to her that he had sent
47:52
Speaker 1: the letter out by email. Later that day, the West
47:56
Speaker 1: Palm Beach FBI squad supervisor told Sloman that he understood
47:59
Speaker 1: it Epstein had rejected the usao's proposal, and he asked
48:03
Speaker 1: when Epstein would be charged. Vilafauna told o PR that
48:07
Speaker 1: the squad supervisor yelled at Slowman about the usao's decision
48:11
Speaker 1: not to prosecute Epstein federally. Sloman similarly told OPR that
48:16
Speaker 1: the squad supervisor, like Villa Fauna and the agents, felt
48:19
Speaker 1: very strongly about the case. See August through September two
48:25
Speaker 1: thousand and seven. Epstein hires additional attorneys, whom he with Acosta.
48:29
Speaker 1: One Acosta agrees to meet with Epstein's new attorneys. Villa
48:34
Speaker 1: Fauna told OPR that Epstein's team was incensed that Acosta
48:38
Speaker 1: would not meet with them and that the USAO had
48:41
Speaker 1: set such a short deadline to respond to its offer.
48:44
Speaker 1: Around this time, Epstein added to his team Kenneth Starr
48:47
Speaker 1: and Jay Lefkowitz, two prominent lawyers from the law firm
48:51
Speaker 1: Kirkland Ellis, whom Acosta knew from his employment decade earlier
48:56
Speaker 1: as an associate at the firm. On the evening of
48:59
Speaker 1: August sixth, too thousand and seven, Slowman email, DaCosta just
49:03
Speaker 1: saw Menchel. I didn't know Kirkland made a call into you.
49:06
Speaker 1: You were right, unbelievable. During their OPR interviews, neither Acosta
49:10
Speaker 1: nor Sloman remembered the call from Kirkland and Ellis and
49:14
Speaker 1: could provide no additional information about the contact or apply.
49:18
Speaker 1: Email from Acosta to Slowman indicates that Kirkland and Ellis
49:22
Speaker 1: attorneys were considering elevating to the Department their objections to
49:26
Speaker 1: the usao's involvement in the Epstein matter. In that email,
49:29
Speaker 1: Acosta stated they are likely to go to DC. We
49:33
Speaker 1: should strategize a bit. We are not changing positions, and
49:37
Speaker 1: that should be made clear. The next day, Acosta wrote
49:40
Speaker 1: to Slowman, Epstein's attorneys want to go to DC on
49:43
Speaker 1: the case on the grounds of a process fel and
49:46
Speaker 1: I have not met with them. I'm concerned that this
49:48
Speaker 1: will delay matters. I'm thinking of heading this off by
49:51
Speaker 1: one agreeing to meet to discuss general legal policy only
49:56
Speaker 1: in the matter in which DC has arguable jurisdiction, while
49:59
Speaker 1: making clear that we are not talking about the details
50:02
Speaker 1: of the case, and two asking CEO's chief Osterbon to
50:07
Speaker 1: participate by teleconference, thereby intercepting the DC meeting thoughts. Acosta
50:14
Speaker 1: told OPR that he had no concerns about departmental scrutiny
50:17
Speaker 1: of the NPA scheme, and that, if anything, he was
50:20
Speaker 1: concerned whether the Department might direct the USAO to drop
50:23
Speaker 1: the case. Two, leading to the meeting with Defense Council
50:27
Speaker 1: Investigative steps or postponed, and the defense continues to oppose
50:31
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna's efforts to obtain the computer evidence. On August eighth,
50:36
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, Villa Fauna informed Acosta that she
50:39
Speaker 1: had spoken with Osterbon, who was willing to join a
50:42
Speaker 1: meeting with the defense. Although he could not do so
50:45
Speaker 1: in person until after August twenty first, he was willing
50:48
Speaker 1: to participate by a phone in order to stay firm
50:51
Speaker 1: in our August seventeenth deadline. Villa Fauna also reiterated that
50:56
Speaker 1: she wanted to contact Epstein's assistance in New York and
51:00
Speaker 1: to interview some of Epstein's colleagues and former employees there.
51:04
Speaker 1: Noting that there was some concern about taking the proposed
51:07
Speaker 1: investigative steps while we were trying to negotiate a plea,
51:11
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna asked Acosta for guidance. Laurie also emailed Acosta
51:15
Speaker 1: and Slowman, asking at the USAO stick to our deadline
51:18
Speaker 1: if possible. Laurie pointed out that CEOs has no approval
51:22
Speaker 1: authority and opined it was a bit extreme to allow
51:25
Speaker 1: the defense to keep arguing this case to different agencies.
51:29
Speaker 1: Acosta applied, this will end up at the Department anyhow,
51:33
Speaker 1: if we don't meet with them. I'd rather keep it here.
51:36
Speaker 1: Bringing the chief of CEOs in visibly does so. If
51:39
Speaker 1: our deadline has to slip a bit, it's worth it.
51:42
Speaker 1: As a result, the investigative steps were postponed. On August tenth,
51:46
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, Villa Fauna emailed LORII, inquiring whether
51:50
Speaker 1: she could still go ahead with the New York trip
51:52
Speaker 1: and whether she could oppose Black's request to stay the
51:54
Speaker 1: litigation concerning the government's efforts to obtain Epstein's computer equipment
51:59
Speaker 1: until after Acosta's meeting with the Defense team. Villafana was
52:03
Speaker 1: reluctant to delay the litigation and reported to LORII that
52:07
Speaker 1: agents recently had interviewed a girl who began seeing Epstein
52:10
Speaker 1: at age fourteen and who was photographed in the nude
52:13
Speaker 1: by an Epstein assistant. On August thirteenth, two thousand and seven,
52:17
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna advised Black that the USAO was not willing
52:21
Speaker 1: to agree to a stay of litigation. However, Sanchez reached
52:24
Speaker 1: out to Louri on August twenty second, two thousand and seven,
52:27
Speaker 1: and obtained his agreement to a joint request for a
52:30
Speaker 1: stay until the week after Acosta's meeting with Defense Council,
52:34
Speaker 1: which was scheduled for September seventh, two thousand and seven.
52:37
Speaker 1: Villafana told OPR that, in her opinion, the defense efforts
52:41
Speaker 1: to put off the litigation concerning the computers was further
52:44
Speaker 1: evidence of the importance of this evidence. Villa Fauna suspected
52:48
Speaker 1: the computers contained evidence that would have put this case
52:52
Speaker 1: completely to bed. She believed that access to the computer
52:55
Speaker 1: evidence would strengthen the government's negotiating position, but that her
52:59
Speaker 1: supervisors did not seem to recognize that. Villa Fauna said
53:03
Speaker 1: that she did not understand why her supervisors were uninterested
53:07
Speaker 1: in determining what the computers contained. Instead, they instructed Villa
53:11
Speaker 1: Fauna to keep calling the judge to ask for a
53:13
Speaker 1: delay in the litigation proceedings. Slowman told OPR that he
53:17
Speaker 1: recalled an issue about the computers, but did not recall
53:21
Speaker 1: what the thinking was at the time about pursuing that
53:24
Speaker 1: evidence or why Villa Fauna was ordered to stand down. Acosta, Menchell,
53:28
Speaker 1: and Laurie all told OPR that they did not recall
53:31
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna's effort to obtain the computer evidence or that
53:34
Speaker 1: they had been in litigation relating to it. Laurie however,
53:38
Speaker 1: told OPR that the computers might have contained very powerful
53:42
Speaker 1: evidence that possibly could have changed our advice to Acosta
53:46
Speaker 1: or his decision making. In his OPR interview, Menchell was
53:49
Speaker 1: uncertain whether the computer evidence would have been useful, but
53:53
Speaker 1: also acknowledged the OPR you always want more as a prosecutor.
53:58
Speaker 1: On August thirty first, two thousand, in preparation for the
54:01
Speaker 1: upcoming September seventh, two thousand and seven meeting with Defense
54:05
Speaker 1: Council that he planned to attend, CEO's chief Osterbonn traveled
54:10
Speaker 1: to the West Palm Beach to meet with Villa Fauna
54:12
Speaker 1: and the case agents and examine the case file. He
54:15
Speaker 1: explained to OPR that he wanted to see the file
54:18
Speaker 1: before meeting with the defense so that he could best
54:21
Speaker 1: represent the interests of the prosecution team, and that he
54:24
Speaker 1: was in favor of going forward with the case. According
54:27
Speaker 1: to Villa Fauna, during his review of the file, Osterbond
54:30
Speaker 1: told her that the case was really good and offered
54:33
Speaker 1: to assist Villa Fauna at a trial. On September sixth,
54:36
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, the day before the meeting with
54:39
Speaker 1: Defense Council, Slowman sent Villafauna an email asking please refresh
54:43
Speaker 1: my recollection, what is the deal on the table? Slowman
54:47
Speaker 1: told OPR that his question reflected the fact that in
54:50
Speaker 1: his capacity as FAUSA, he was involved in one hundred
54:54
Speaker 1: other things. At that time. Villafana sent Sloman the term
54:57
Speaker 1: sheet and explained to him, you and Matt Menchell and
55:00
Speaker 1: I had also discussed a possible federal plea to an
55:03
Speaker 1: information charging a three hundred and seventy one conspiracy with
55:06
Speaker 1: a Rule eleven plea with a two year cab but
55:09
Speaker 1: I think Matt must have asked Alex about it and
55:12
Speaker 1: was mixed. Villa Fauna continued, there are three concerns that
55:16
Speaker 1: I hope we can address tomorrow. First, that there is
55:18
Speaker 1: an absolute drop dead date for accepting or rejecting, because
55:22
Speaker 1: it is strategically important that we indict before the end
55:25
Speaker 1: of September, which means September twenty fifth. Second, the agents
55:29
Speaker 1: that I have not reached out to the victims to
55:31
Speaker 1: get their approval, which is Drew Osterband politely reminded me
55:35
Speaker 1: is required under the law. And Third, I do not
55:38
Speaker 1: want to make any promises about allowing Epstein to self
55:42
Speaker 1: surrender because I still believe that we have a good
55:44
Speaker 1: chance of getting him detained. Villa Fauna added that the
55:48
Speaker 1: pom Beach chief had alerted the FBI that an upcoming
55:51
Speaker 1: news article would report that Epstein was going to plead
55:54
Speaker 1: to a state charge, and that pom Beach chief wanted
55:56
Speaker 1: to know if the victims had been consulted about the deal.
56:00
Speaker 1: Slowman forwarded Villafanna's email to Acosta with a note that
56:04
Speaker 1: read simply FYI. Later that evening, Villa Fauna circulated to Slowman, Lori,
56:10
Speaker 1: and Osterbond two alternative documents, a draft Federal Plea Agreement
56:14
Speaker 1: and a draft NPA. The draft Federal Plea Agreement, following
56:18
Speaker 1: the USAO standard format, called for Epstein to plead guilty
56:21
Speaker 1: to a five year conspiracy under US Code eighteen, Section
56:25
Speaker 1: three seventy one to entice miners to engage in prostitution,
56:29
Speaker 1: an offense requiring registration as a sexual offender, with a
56:33
Speaker 1: Rule eleven C binding sentence of two years imprisonment. The
56:37
Speaker 1: draft NPA contained the terms presented to the defense team
56:40
Speaker 1: on July thirty first, two thousand and seven, and called
56:43
Speaker 1: for Epstein to enter a state plea by September twenty eighth,
56:46
Speaker 1: two thousand seven. Villa Fauna told OPR that because she
56:50
Speaker 1: had never seen a non prosecution agreement before, she replied
56:53
Speaker 1: on a template she found either using USAO or the
56:56
Speaker 1: department's internal online resources, but she did not do any
57:00
Speaker 1: additional research regarding the use of a non prosecution agreement.
57:04
Speaker 1: All right, we're gonna wrap up this episode here, and
57:07
Speaker 1: then the next episode we'll pick up where we left off.
57:10
Speaker 1: All of the information that goes with this episode can
57:13
Speaker 1: be found in the description box. What's up, everyone, and
57:17
Speaker 1: welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're
57:20
Speaker 1: picking up where we left off with the OIG report
57:24
Speaker 1: into Jeffrey Epstein's non prosecution agreement. Three September seventh, two
57:30
Speaker 1: thousand and seven, Acosta, other USAO attorneys, and FBI supervisors
57:35
Speaker 1: meet with Epstein attorneys Star Left, Kowitz, and Sanchez. On Friday,
57:40
Speaker 1: September seventh, two thousand and seven, Acosta, Slowman, Villa, Fauna,
57:44
Speaker 1: Villafana's co council Austerbond, and one or two supervisory FBI
57:49
Speaker 1: agents met at the usao's West Palm Beach office while
57:53
Speaker 1: defense attorney Sanchez and for the first time, Star and
57:56
Speaker 1: Left Kuwitz. This was Acosta's first meeting with Epstein's de
58:00
Speaker 1: defense team. Villa Fauna understood the purpose of this meeting
58:03
Speaker 1: was to afford Epstein's council an opportunity to make a
58:06
Speaker 1: pitch as to why the case should not be prosecuted federally.
58:11
Speaker 1: Villafana recalled that at a pre meet before a defense
58:13
Speaker 1: council arrived, Acosta did not express concern about the viability
58:18
Speaker 1: of the prosecution or the strength of the case. Acosta
58:21
Speaker 1: told OPR that the meeting was not a negotiation, but
58:25
Speaker 1: a chance for the defense to present their arguments, which
58:28
Speaker 1: were made by Star and focused primarily on federalism. Villa
58:32
Speaker 1: Fauna similarly recalled that the meeting mainly consisted of the
58:35
Speaker 1: defense argument that the Epstein case should remain a state
58:39
Speaker 1: matter in which the USAO should not interfere. Both Villa
58:43
Speaker 1: Fauna and her co council recalled that Starr addressed himself
58:47
Speaker 1: directly to Acosta, and that Star, who had held the
58:50
Speaker 1: Senate confirmed positions in the government, commented to Acosta that
58:54
Speaker 1: he and Acosta were the only people in this room
58:57
Speaker 1: who have run the gauntlet of the confirmation by the Senate.
59:00
Speaker 1: Acosta did not recall the comment, but he told OPR
59:04
Speaker 1: back in July, we had decided that we were going forward,
59:08
Speaker 1: that either there is going to be pre indictment resolution
59:11
Speaker 1: or we go forward with an indictment. The September meeting
59:15
Speaker 1: did not alter or shift our position. Villafana told OPR
59:19
Speaker 1: that after hearing the defense argument, Acosta reiterated that the
59:23
Speaker 1: federal interest in the case could be vindicated only by
59:26
Speaker 1: a state plea to an offense that required sexual offender registration,
59:31
Speaker 1: resulted in a two year term of incarceration, and was
59:34
Speaker 1: subject to the US Code eighteen, section twenty two to
59:37
Speaker 1: fifty five process for providing compensation to the victims. When
59:42
Speaker 1: Defense Council objected to the registration requirement, Acosta held firm,
59:46
Speaker 1: and he also rejected the defense proposal for a sentence
59:49
Speaker 1: of home confinement. In a subsequent email exchange with Criminal
59:53
Speaker 1: Division Deputy Assistant Attorney General Sigel Mandelker, who supervised CEO's offer,
1:00:00
Speaker 1: Terbaon reported that the meeting was non eventful, noting that
1:00:03
Speaker 1: Defense Council argued federalism and might approach Criminal Division Assistant
1:00:08
Speaker 1: Attorney General Alice Fisher to present that argument directly. Tour
1:00:13
Speaker 1: six September two thousand and seven, the plea negotiations intensify
1:00:18
Speaker 1: and the process the required term of imprisonment is reduced.
1:00:23
Speaker 1: Acosta had dispense with the August seventeenth, two thousand and
1:00:26
Speaker 1: seven plea deadline specified in Menchal's August third, two thousand
1:00:30
Speaker 1: and seven letter in order to allow the defense to
1:00:33
Speaker 1: meet with them. After that meeting, and although Villa Fauna
1:00:36
Speaker 1: continued to plan the file charges on September twenty fifth,
1:00:40
Speaker 1: no new plea deadline was established, and the negotiations continued
1:00:44
Speaker 1: through most of September. The defense used that time to
1:00:47
Speaker 1: push the USAO to make concessions. Because Acosta was not
1:00:51
Speaker 1: willing to compromise on the issue of sexual offender registration
1:00:55
Speaker 1: or providing a means through which the victims could seek
1:00:57
Speaker 1: monetary damages, the negotiations focused on the term of imprisonment.
1:01:02
Speaker 1: As the contemporaneous emails show, the USAO did not hold
1:01:06
Speaker 1: to its position that a two year term of imprisonment
1:01:09
Speaker 1: was the minimum that the USAO would accept to reach
1:01:12
Speaker 1: an agreement with the defense on Epstein's sentence. The USAO
1:01:16
Speaker 1: explored possible pleas in either federal or state court, or both,
1:01:20
Speaker 1: and Villafauna spent considerable time and effort working with Defense
1:01:24
Speaker 1: counsel on developing alternative pleas with various outcomes. In the
1:01:28
Speaker 1: course of that process, the agreement was revised to require
1:01:32
Speaker 1: that Epstein accept the sentence of eighteen months, with the
1:01:35
Speaker 1: understanding that under the state's sentencing procedures he would likely
1:01:39
Speaker 1: serve just fifteen months. A the incarceration term is reduced
1:01:44
Speaker 1: from twenty four months to twenty months. Shortly after the
1:01:48
Speaker 1: September seventh, two thousand and seven meeting, epstein attorney Gerald Lefcourt,
1:01:52
Speaker 1: who had not been present at the meeting, spoke with
1:01:55
Speaker 1: both Acosta and Lori and made a new counter offer,
1:01:58
Speaker 1: proposing that Epstein served fit fifteen months in jail, followed
1:02:01
Speaker 1: by fifteen months in home confinement. On the afternoon of Monday,
1:02:05
Speaker 1: September tenth, two thousand and seven, Villa Fauna emailed Slowman,
1:02:09
Speaker 1: identifying issues she wanted to discuss with them, including her
1:02:12
Speaker 1: concern that Defense Council was pushing for a resolution that
1:02:16
Speaker 1: would allow Epstein to avoid incarceration and possibly sexual offender registration.
1:02:22
Speaker 1: Villafana stated that Lefcourt's counteroffer was a reasonable counter offer
1:02:26
Speaker 1: in light of our starting position of twenty four months,
1:02:29
Speaker 1: but added that it was a really low sentence. Villa
1:02:32
Speaker 1: Fauna noted that the revised charges involved nineteen victims, so
1:02:36
Speaker 1: the defense proposal for a fifteen month sentence amounted to
1:02:39
Speaker 1: less than one month per victim. Villafana requested that whatever
1:02:43
Speaker 1: the US Attorney decides to do, the agreement with Epstein
1:02:46
Speaker 1: should follow a version of my written non prosecution agreement
1:02:50
Speaker 1: in order to avoid any state shenanigans and to keep
1:02:53
Speaker 1: the defense on a strict timeline. Later that day, Villa
1:02:57
Speaker 1: Fauna circulated to Acosta and Slowman a revised NPA that
1:03:01
Speaker 1: called for a twenty month jail sentence to be followed
1:03:04
Speaker 1: by ten months of home confinement. This redrafted NPA contained
1:03:09
Speaker 1: a provision that specified, with credit for gain time, Epstein
1:03:13
Speaker 1: shall serve at least seventeen months in a state correctional institution.
1:03:17
Speaker 1: Acosta reviewed the revised NPA and amended it to include
1:03:21
Speaker 1: a statement clarifying that it was Epstein's obligation to undertake
1:03:24
Speaker 1: discussions with the State of Florida to ensure compliance with
1:03:28
Speaker 1: these procedures. Villa Fauna's sent her version of the revised
1:03:32
Speaker 1: NPA to left court that afternoon and forwarded Acosta's proposed
1:03:36
Speaker 1: change to him the following day after she learned of it.
1:03:39
Speaker 1: On September eleventh, two thousand and seven, the court contacted
1:03:42
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna to inquire whether USAO had to be prepared
1:03:46
Speaker 1: to proceed with the litigation concerning the computers. The following day,
1:03:51
Speaker 1: at Sloman's direction, Villa Fauna asked the court to delay
1:03:54
Speaker 1: the hearing, and the court rescheduled it for the following week.
1:03:57
Speaker 1: At the same time, anticipating that please negotiations would fail,
1:04:01
Speaker 1: Villa Fauna circulated a revised indictment to her co council
1:04:05
Speaker 1: and Osterbon, seeking their feedback before sending it through the
1:04:09
Speaker 1: chain of command. Villa Fauna also sent Osterbon the revised
1:04:13
Speaker 1: NPA and told them she was still shooting for nine
1:04:16
Speaker 1: twenty five to bring charges assuming the defense declined the
1:04:20
Speaker 1: usao's offer. Osterbon responded, the counteroffering is unfortunate, but I
1:04:25
Speaker 1: suppose it's understandable. That afternoon, LORI asked Villa Fauna, what's
1:04:30
Speaker 1: our latest offer. Villafana responded, plead to the three specified
1:04:34
Speaker 1: state charges, a thirty month sentence split twenty in jail
1:04:38
Speaker 1: and ten in community control, and agree that the girls
1:04:41
Speaker 1: are victims for purposes of damages. We also put in
1:04:44
Speaker 1: deadlines for a plea and sentencing date. B September twelfth,
1:04:49
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven, the USAO and the Defense Council
1:04:53
Speaker 1: meet with the State Attorney. Although the USAO and the
1:04:56
Speaker 1: Defense Council had been discussing resolving the federal investigation with
1:05:00
Speaker 1: a plea to state charges, there is no evidence that
1:05:03
Speaker 1: the USAO involved the State Attorney's office in those discussions
1:05:07
Speaker 1: until September twelfth, two thousand and seven. On that day,
1:05:10
Speaker 1: Lori Villafauna and another USAO supervisor who would be replacing
1:05:15
Speaker 1: Lori as manager of the usao's West Palm Beach office,
1:05:19
Speaker 1: and Depstein's attorneys Lefkowitz, left court and Goldberger met with
1:05:23
Speaker 1: State Attorney Barry Krisher an assistant State Attorney Lana Bellhovlik.
1:05:28
Speaker 1: Other than Villa Fauna, few of the participants had any
1:05:31
Speaker 1: memory of the meeting or the results of it. The
1:05:33
Speaker 1: available evidence indicates that the USAO made additional concessions during
1:05:38
Speaker 1: the meeting. Villafana told OPR that during the meeting, the
1:05:42
Speaker 1: group discussed the draft NPA, but she did not think
1:05:46
Speaker 1: they gave a copy to Krisher and BELLOHOVLC neither Krisher
1:05:50
Speaker 1: nor Bellohovlk expressed concern about proceeding as the USAO was proposing.
1:05:55
Speaker 1: According to Villafauna, Bellohovlik explained that a plea to the
1:05:59
Speaker 1: three state counts identified in the draft NPA would affect
1:06:02
Speaker 1: the state sentencing guidelines, and it would be better for
1:06:05
Speaker 1: the guidelines calculation if Epstein pled guilty to just one
1:06:09
Speaker 1: of the three counts. Villafana recalled that when Bellohovlik confirmed
1:06:13
Speaker 1: that Epstein would be required to register as a sexual
1:06:15
Speaker 1: offender if he pled to any of the three charges, Lourie,
1:06:19
Speaker 1: speaking for the USAO, agreed to allow Epstein to enter
1:06:23
Speaker 1: his plea to just one state charge in addition to
1:06:26
Speaker 1: the pending state indictment, and the defense attorneys selected the
1:06:30
Speaker 1: charge of procurement of miners to engage in prostitution. Laurie, however,
1:06:35
Speaker 1: disputed Villa Fauna's recollection he made the final decision, stating
1:06:39
Speaker 1: that it was illogical to conclude that he had the
1:06:41
Speaker 1: authority to change the terms of the agreement unilaterally. During
1:06:46
Speaker 1: the meeting, the Defense Council raised concerns about Epstein serving
1:06:49
Speaker 1: time in state prison. Villa Fauna also told OPR that LORII,
1:06:54
Speaker 1: the other supervisor, and she made clear during the meeting
1:06:57
Speaker 1: that they expected Epstein to be incarcerated to twenty four
1:07:00
Speaker 1: hours a day, seven days a week, during the entirety
1:07:03
Speaker 1: of his sentence, and they did not particularly care whether
1:07:06
Speaker 1: it was in state or a local facility. Bellohovlik explained
1:07:10
Speaker 1: to OPR that in order for Epstein to serve his
1:07:13
Speaker 1: time in a county facility rather than stay at prison,
1:07:16
Speaker 1: his sentence on each charge could be no more than
1:07:19
Speaker 1: twelve months, so that, for example, consecutive terms of twelve
1:07:23
Speaker 1: months and six months totaling eighteen months could be served
1:07:26
Speaker 1: in the county jail. Villa Fauna told OPR our thing
1:07:30
Speaker 1: was incarceration twenty four hours a day. So during this meeting,
1:07:34
Speaker 1: I remember the defense talking about a one year account
1:07:37
Speaker 1: followed by a six month count that Epstein could serve
1:07:40
Speaker 1: them back to back, but at the county jail rather
1:07:43
Speaker 1: than having to go to a state facility. But then
1:07:45
Speaker 1: I said, if you do that, it's still going to
1:07:47
Speaker 1: have to be around the clock incarceration, and Barry Krisher
1:07:50
Speaker 1: said yes, and he said that to avoid Epstein being
1:07:54
Speaker 1: extorted while incarcerated, he would be kept in solitary confinement.
1:07:59
Speaker 1: Vilafauna didn't recall whether she and Laurie agreed to an
1:08:02
Speaker 1: eighteen month sentence during the meeting, but she told OPR that,
1:08:05
Speaker 1: in her view, allowing Epstein to serve as sentence in
1:08:08
Speaker 1: the county jail was not a concession because he would
1:08:11
Speaker 1: be incarcerated regardless. Neither Lori nor the other USAO supervisor
1:08:16
Speaker 1: president could recall any substantiative details of the September twelfth,
1:08:21
Speaker 1: two thousand and seven meeting, and Krisher and Bellohovlik told
1:08:24
Speaker 1: OPR they did not remember the meeting at all. Chrisher did, however,
1:08:28
Speaker 1: recall that he was not offended at all when he
1:08:30
Speaker 1: learned of the proposed federal resolution requiring Epstein to plead
1:08:35
Speaker 1: to both pending state indictment and an additional charge requiring
1:08:38
Speaker 1: sexual offender registration, explaining to OPR that Epstein was going
1:08:43
Speaker 1: to plead guilty to my indictment, we were going to
1:08:45
Speaker 1: add an additional charge, he was going to become a
1:08:48
Speaker 1: registered sex offender, and he was going to go actually
1:08:52
Speaker 1: due time, which he hadn't done up to this point.
1:08:55
Speaker 1: Chrisher asked, why would I turn that down? Krisher also
1:08:58
Speaker 1: noted that at that time, sexual offender registration was not
1:09:01
Speaker 1: the norm in Florida, and he recognized that it was
1:09:04
Speaker 1: clearly something that was important to the US Attorney's office.
1:09:08
Speaker 1: A Costa told OPR that he did not recall if
1:09:10
Speaker 1: he learned what transpired at the September twelfth meeting, nor
1:09:14
Speaker 1: did he recall why the USAO team agreed to permit
1:09:17
Speaker 1: Epstein to plead guilty to only one charge. A Costa
1:09:20
Speaker 1: told OPR, however, that he recognized that Villa Fauna and
1:09:23
Speaker 1: Lorie needed some degree of discretion to negotiate, that in
1:09:27
Speaker 1: the give and take of negotiations, they might propose a concession,
1:09:31
Speaker 1: and he was comfortable with the concession as long as
1:09:34
Speaker 1: the charge to which Epstein ultimately pled captured the conduct
1:09:38
Speaker 1: in an appropriate way. Although Epstein's attorneys expressed interest in
1:09:42
Speaker 1: Epstein's serving his time in a county facility rather than
1:09:46
Speaker 1: state prison, one of Epstein's attorneys alternatively expressed interest in
1:09:50
Speaker 1: Epstein's serving time in a federal facility, and along with
1:09:54
Speaker 1: discussions about the possible state resolution, the USAO and Epstein's
1:09:58
Speaker 1: council also discussed possible federal plea. With the sentence running
1:10:02
Speaker 1: concurrently to the sentence Epstein would receive on the already
1:10:05
Speaker 1: indicted state charge. Later that day, Villa Fauna sent Lefkowitz
1:10:09
Speaker 1: an email advising that she and Laurie had talked with
1:10:13
Speaker 1: Acosta and Slowman and they were all satisfied in principle
1:10:16
Speaker 1: with the agreement. The next day, September thirteenth, two thousand
1:10:19
Speaker 1: and seven, Vila Fauna sent an email to Acosta, Sloman, Louri,
1:10:23
Speaker 1: and two other supervisors identifying potential federal offenses that would
1:10:28
Speaker 1: yield a two year sentence. Villa Fauna also emailed Defense
1:10:31
Speaker 1: Council stating that she had been spending some quality time
1:10:35
Speaker 1: with Title eighteen, referring to the Code of Federal Criminal
1:10:38
Speaker 1: Statutes to make sure there would be a factual basis
1:10:42
Speaker 1: for any federal plea and identifying the federal statutes she
1:10:46
Speaker 1: was considering, all right, we're going to wrap up right
1:10:48
Speaker 1: here and in the next episode, we're going to pick
1:10:50
Speaker 1: up where we left off. And that's with See, the
1:10:53
Speaker 1: evidence does not clearly show why the term of incarceration
1:10:57
Speaker 1: was reduced from twenty four months to twenty months two
1:11:00
Speaker 1: eighteen months. All of the information that goes with this
1:11:04
Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box